State v. Fenderson

2022-Ohio-1973 (Ohio Ct. App. 2022) · Ohio Court of Appeals, Sixth Appellate District, Erie County · June 10, 2022 · No. E-21-018

Summary

The Sixth District Court of Appeals of Ohio reviews Takye S. Fenderson’s convictions for drug possession, drug trafficking, and corrupting another with drugs. The opinion addresses merger of allied offenses, a requested mistrial, denial of a continuance, ineffective assistance concerning an untimely suppression motion, the sufficiency and manifest weight of the evidence, and alleged constitutional violations in jury selection. The court states that it affirms in part and reverses in part.

Holdings

  1. Counsel was not ineffective because Fenderson failed to show a reasonable probability that a timely motion to suppress would have been granted.
  2. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by denying Fenderson's oral motion for a continuance made on the morning of trial.
  3. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by denying a mistrial because its curative instruction sufficiently protected the fairness of the trial.
  4. The assignment of error was not well taken because Fenderson failed to develop an argument supporting it.
  5. The convictions for possession of drugs, trafficking in drugs, and corrupting another with drugs were supported by sufficient evidence and were not against the manifest weight of the evidence.
  6. Possession of drugs and trafficking in drugs were allied offenses of similar import based on the same conduct and should have merged at sentencing.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether trial counsel was ineffective for filing the motion to suppress after the deadline.
  2. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by denying Fenderson's morning-of-trial motion for a continuance.
  3. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by denying a mistrial after an altercation between members of the parties' families occurred in view of some jurors.
  4. Whether Fenderson's due-process and equal-protection rights were violated because the jury was all white.
  5. Whether the convictions for possession, trafficking, and corrupting another with drugs were supported by sufficient evidence and were not against the manifest weight of the evidence.
  6. Whether possession and trafficking were allied offenses of similar import requiring merger at sentencing.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded

Cases Cited (33)

  • Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687-688, 694, 697, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984)(followed)
  • State v. Hernandez, 6th Dist. Lucas Nos. L-06-1388, L-06-1389, 2009-Ohio-386, ¶ 83(followed)
  • State v. Kuhn, 9th Dist. Lorain No. 05CA008859, 2006-Ohio-4416, ¶ 11(followed)
  • State v. Leak, 145 Ohio St.3d 165, 2016-Ohio-154, 47 N.E.3d 821, ¶¶ 13-15(followed)
  • Florida v. Jimeno, 500 U.S. 248, 250, 111 S.Ct. 1801, 114 L.Ed.2d 297 (1991)(followed)
  • South Dakota v. Opperman, 428 U.S. 364, 375, 96 S.Ct. 3092, 49 L.Ed.2d 1000 (1976)(followed)
  • Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 88 S.Ct. 1868, 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968)(followed)
  • State v. Tidwell, 165 Ohio St.3d 57, 2021-Ohio-2072, 175 N.E.3d 527, ¶¶ 19-20(followed)
  • Alabama v. White, 496 U.S. 325, 330, 110 S.Ct. 2412, 110 L.Ed.2d 301 (1990)(followed)
  • United States v. Arvizu, 534 U.S. 266, 273, 122 S.Ct. 744, 151 L.Ed.2d 740 (2002)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 33.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Download CaseDownload Case DataDownload Case and DataDownload AI Instructions

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…