DUI Lawyers Directory. Search for a dui lawyer near you. Operating a vehicle while drinking could cause judicial actions.
 Zip Code Search for DUI Lawyers
Defending Alleged Drunk Driving Criminal Acts Read about successful dui defense cases from member dui lawyers Read about successful dui defense cases from member dui lawyers Membership at DUI Defenders Discuss issues related to dui/dwi/owi Contact Us about a DUI Lawyer
facebook.com/MyDUI

  to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.

State v. Monroe

9/21/2000



APPEAL from the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas.


Jonathan D. Monroe, defendant-appellant, appeals the November 22, 1999 judgment of the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas finding him not guilty of aggravated murder, a violation of R.C. 2903.01, but guilty of the lesser-included offense of murder, in violation of R.C. 2903.02, with a firearm specification, in accordance with R.C. 2941.145.


On September 24, 1998, appellant and James Latham, the victim, were at Jeff's Place, a bar in Columbus, Ohio. Appellant fatally shot Latham near a pool table at Jeff's Place. At trial, three men, Wallace Vale, Marco St. John, and Sean West, who were present at the bar that night, testified on behalf of the state as to the events leading up to the shooting. Latanya Johnson, Latham's cousin; several columbus police officers; and Keith Norton, M.D., the Franklin County Deputy Coroner, also testified for the state. Two witnesses, Tyron West and Tiffany Hughes, testified on behalf of appellant regarding the events of that night. Officer Carl Rankin testified regarding the police investigation at Jeff's Place. Appellant also testified on his own behalf, claiming that he shot Latham in self-defense after Latham shot at him first. The testimony of these witnesses and appellant, as to the events leading up to the shooting, are somewhat varied, and the pertinent testimony will be detailed in the discussion of the assignments of error.


On December 21, 1998, appellant was charged with one count of aggravated murder, in violation of R.C. 2903.01. On January 7, 1999, a Governor's Warrant was issued. After appellant was found in Florida, he waived extradition and was returned to Ohio.


On November 3, 1999, a jury trial commenced. On November 10, 1999, the jury returned a verdict of not guilty on the aggravated murder count but guilty of the lesser-included offense of murder, with a firearm specification. On November 22, 1999, the trial court issued a judgment entry imposing a prison sentence of fifteen years to life, and an additional three-year prison term for the firearm specification. Appellant appeals the judgment of the trial court finding him guilty of murder, asserting the following three assignments of error:


I. The trial court committed reversible error by failing to instruct the jury on the lesser included offense of voluntary manslaughter when the instruction was warranted by the facts.


II. Appellant was denied effective assistance of counsel as guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Section 10, Article I of the Ohio Constitution by the failure of the trial counsel to request a jury instruction on the lesser included offense of voluntary manslaughter.


III. The judgment of the trial court is contrary to the weight of the evidence.


We will address appellant's third assignment of error first because the facts relevant to the third assignment of error are helpful in addressing the first and second assignments of error. Appellant asserts in his third assignment of error that the conviction was not supported by the manifest weight of the evidence. The weight of the evidence concerns the inclination of the greater amount of credible evidence offered in a trial to support one side of the issue rather than the other. State v. Gray (Mar. 28, 2000), Franklin App. No. 99AP-666, unreported, following State v. Clemons (1998), 82 Ohio St.3d 438, 444. In order for a court of appeals to reverse the judgment of a trial court, on the basis that the jury's verdict is against the manifest weight of the evidence, the appellate court must unanimously disagree with the factfinder's resolution of the conf

Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 

Ohio DUI Attorneys    DUI Lawyers


  to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.

DUI Driving Defined Highway Defined
Under Influence Defined DUI/3 Strikes DUI & Manslaughter
DUI & Murder DUI Punishment Sobriety Checkpoints
DMV's Role in DUI Revocation vs. Suspension Field Sobriety Testing
Speed Measurement Prior DUI Convictions Drawing Blood & Consent
Refusal to Test DUI Lawyers Testimonials by Member DUI Lawyers
DUI Articles Ignition Interlock Implied Consent
Summary DUI License Suspension In-home Arrest Vehicle Defined
FDP  |   RSS Feeds  |  Articles  |  Jobs  |  Leads  |  Partner Websites  |  Draeger FAQ
SiteMap | DUI Blog | DUI Lawyers | DUI Attorneys | Trading Partners | Member Agreement | Terms of Service
Attorneys Click Here | DUI Case Laws | FAQ | DUI Forum | Directory of DUI Attorneys | Success Stories  | Press Releases
Copyright © 2004. “DUI Defenders”. All rights reserved.