State v. Johnson

2025 Ohio 713 · Ohio Court of Appeals, Third Appellate District, Marion County · March 3, 2025 · No. 9-24-04

Summary

This Ohio Court of Appeals opinion affirms a defendant's conviction for possession of cocaine. The court reviews challenges to the sufficiency of the evidence regarding venue and knowing possession, as well as the trial court's admission of a witness's prior inconsistent statement for impeachment purposes. Concluding that the evidence was sufficient and no reversible error occurred, the appellate court upholds the lower court's judgment.

Court
Ohio Court of Appeals, Third Appellate District, Marion County
Writing for the Court
Miller, J.
Jurisdiction
Ohio
Decision date
March 3, 2025
Docket number
9-24-04
Procedural posture
Appeal from Marion County Common Pleas Court General Division, Judgment affirmed
Standard of review
de novo for sufficiency of the evidence; abuse of discretion for evidentiary rulings
Precedential value
published
Parties
Myron Withers Johnson v. State of Ohio
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

appellate procedurestandard of reviewcriminal procedureevidence

Practice areas

criminal lawappellate law

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the evidence was sufficient to support Johnson's conviction for possession of cocaine.
  2. Whether Johnson's conviction was against the manifest weight of the evidence.
  3. Whether the trial court erred in admitting Detective Baldridge's testimony about Morales's prior inconsistent statement.

Holdings

  1. The evidence, when viewed in the light most favorable to the State, was sufficient to support the conviction; the judgment is affirmed.
  2. The conviction was not against the manifest weight of the evidence; the judgment is affirmed.
  3. The trial court did not commit reversible error; the admission of the prior inconsistent statement was proper and did not prejudice the conviction.

Key quotations

“An appellate court’s function when reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence to support a criminal conviction is to examine the evidence admitted at trial to determine whether such evidence, if believed, would convince the average mind of the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.” (¶15)
“The issue of whether a person charged with drug possession knowingly possessed a controlled substance ‘is to be determined from all the attendant facts and circumstances available.’” (¶24)

Factual background

In August 2022 Johnson was stopped for illegal window tint and a suspended license. During the stop a passenger, Kaitlyn Morales, was found with baggies of crack cocaine and fentanyl in her pants. Johnson was found with $884 cash. He denied knowledge of the drugs and that he had traveled to Detroit, Ohio. The jury convicted him of possession of cocaine.

Procedural history

Johnson was convicted of possession of cocaine and sentenced to 11‑16.5 years. He appealed alleging insufficient evidence, manifest weight error, and improper admission of a prior inconsistent statement.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…