State Of Ohio V. ROBERTS T
| Decision Date | 18 June 2010 |
| Docket Number | Case No. 09 CA 11 |
| Citation | 2010 Ohio 2935 |
| Parties | STATE OF OHIO Plaintiff-Appellee v. CLARENCE D. (SKIP) ROBERTS Defendant-Appellant |
| Court | Ohio Court of Appeals |
{¶1} Appellant, Clarence "Skip" Roberts, appeals a judgment of the Guernsey County Common Pleas Court overruling his motion for new trial. Appellee is the State of Ohio.
{¶2} On June 30, 1997, the Guernsey County Grand Jury indicted appellant on one count of aggravated robbery, in violation of R.C. 2911.01, and one count of aggravated murder, in violation of R.C. 2903.01, with a death penalty specification. The charges arose out of the robbery and stabbing death of Leo Sinnett on May 17, 1997. The matter proceeded to trial by jury on September 15, 1997.
{¶3} The following evidence was adduced at trial.
{¶4} On May 15, 1997, appellant, Albert "Chip" Andrews, John LaFollette, and Mia Willey traveled to Zanesville, Ohio, in appellant's white 1986 Oldsmobile Cutlas Cierra on a "drug buy." Appellant and Andrews purchased $100.00 worth of crack cocaine from "a black guy in Zanesville" with money borrowed from Willey. After smoking the crack, appellant and Andrews returned to the dealer's house in order to get their money back because they were not satisfied with the quality of the drugs. The dealer refused to offer a money back guarantee and the group's discussion focused on where to obtain money to buy more drugs. Andrews stated he knew somebody the group could rob. When Andrews mentioned Leo Sinnett's name, appellant suggested foregoing the robbing of Sinnett and proceeding to kill him. Andrew, LaFollette and Willey were named as co-defendants.
{¶5} On May 17, 1997, the group reconvened at Willey's house. Appellant and Andrews left to purchase beer and cigarettes. When they returned, appellant and Andrews asked LaFollette if he wanted to go for a drive. Andrews drove appellant's vehicle; appellant sat in the front passenger's seat; and LaFollette positioned himself in the back seat. Andrews drove to 12225 Lincoln Street, Buffalo, Ohio, Sinnett's residence. Appellant and LaFollette exited the car. Andrews remained in the vehicle. LaFollette walked to the front of the house to inspect some trees he had arranged to remove for Sinnett. As appellant exited the front door of Sinnett's residence, he told LaFollette, "There's no need in talking to him, he's dead." The two returned to the vehicle and the trio left the scene.
{¶6} At 6:49 p.m. on the same evening, Sergeant Brian Vierstra of the Ohio State Highway Patrol observed a white Oldsmobile traveling westbound out of Buffalo on State Route 313, just past the I-77 bypass. As the vehicle approached, Sergeant Vierstra noticed the car did not have any visible front registration. When the vehicle traveled past, the officer did not observe any visible rear registration. Thereafter, Sergeant Vierstra activated his lights and pursued the vehicle, which continued westbound until the driver entered a private driveway. The driver and right front passenger exited the vehicle. The officer ordered the passenger back into the vehicle and instructed the driver to walk to the back of the car. Sergeant Vierstra observed a third male in the back seat of the vehicle.
{¶7} As the officer spoke with the driver, who was identified as Andrews, Sergeant Vierstra found him to be under the influence of alcohol. When Andrewsrefused to submit to field sobriety tests, the officer placed him under arrest. Shortly thereafter, Trooper Stolarick arrived at the scene.
{¶8} The two officers spoke with appellant, who was covered in blood from his waist to his knees. Trooper Stolarick asked appellant about the blood. Appellant informed the officers he had just processed a road kill deer. When the officers advised appellant the vehicle would be impounded, appellant told them he had a knife on his person. Sergeant Vierstra described the weapon as a four inch, double-edged knife with a black handle contained in a leather sheath.
{¶9} As the officers spoke with appellant, LaFollette exited the vehicle and walked directly into a nearby residence. The officers did not observe any blood on his clothing or his person. Jim Tuttle, the owner of the house, appeared and offered to allow appellant and LaFollette to stay with him. Thereafter, Sergeant Vierstra transported Andrews to the station, while Trooper Stolarick waited for the tow truck to impound appellant's vehicle.
{¶10} After leaving the scene, Trooper Stolarick contacted Deputy Masters of the Cambridge Sheriff's Department to inform the deputy he (Trooper Stolarick) was assisting that evening in overseeing the Meadowbrook High School prom goers. During their conversation, Deputy Masters received a call from his dispatcher advising of the discovery of a body. Deputy Masters and Trooper Stolarick proceeded to the Sinnett residence. Upon their arrival, the officers learned of Sinnett's stabbing death. The Trooper recalled the traffic stop he and Sergeant Vierstra made earlier that evening. Deputy Masters, Trooper Stolarick and two other deputies did not locate anyone upon their return to the Tuttle residence.
{¶11} The following day, appellant was arrested. LaFollette fled to Pennsylvania where he was arrested approximately one month after the incident.
{¶12} Special Agent Mike Kopfer of the Bureau of Criminal Identification assisted in the investigation of Sinnett's homicide. During his investigation, Agent Kopfer found blood stains on the front passenger's seat of the white Oldsmobile. The agent did not observe any other blood stains in the vehicle. Margaret Saupe, a forensic scientist with the Bureau of Criminal Identification, also examined the Oldsmobile and observed blood stains on the front passenger's seat. A DNA analysis of the blood sample indicated the blood was that of the victim. Saupe's analysis of Andrews' personal belongings, which were recovered during the investigation, revealed no traces of blood.
{¶13} After LaFollette's arrest in Pennsylvania, he gave two taped statements to the Guernsey County Sheriff's Department. LaFollette's first statement was given to Detective Ron Pollock on June 18, 1997. The second was given to Detective Pollock and Detective John Davis on June 25, 1997.
{¶14} At trial, appellant called LaFollette as a witness. Due to LaFollette's alignment with the State, the trial court permitted both parties latitude in their examinations of LaFollette. Attorney Tingle, appellant's trial counsel, attempted to impeach LaFollette with his prior statements. However, the trial court found the statements were not inconsistent with the witness' trial testimony and would not allow Attorney Tingle to make further inquiry into the statements LaFollette made to police. The statements were proffered into evidence.
{¶15} After hearing all the evidence and deliberations, the jury found appellant guilty of aggravated robbery and aggravated murder. The jury did not recommend thedeath sentence. Via Judgment of Conviction dated October 6, 1997, the trial court memorialized the jury's verdicts. Via Judgment Entry of Sentence dated November 4, 1997, the trial court sentenced appellant to life imprisonment without parole for the offense of aggravated murder and a term of ten years for the offense of aggravated robbery. The trial court ordered the sentences to run consecutively.
{¶16} Appellant filed a direct appeal to this Court. This Court affirmed the trial court. See State v. Roberts (Nov. 24, 1998), Guernsey App. No. 97 CA 29.
{¶17} After unsuccessfully appealing his case in the Ohio state courts, Roberts filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio. The district court denied the writ. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals granted Roberts a certificate of appealability with respect to the following claims: (1) whether Roberts was deprived of a fair trial, a trial by jury, and due process when the trial court ordered that alternate jurors be present during deliberations; and (2) whether Roberts was deprived of the effective assistance of appellate counsel when his appellate counsel failed to raise as error the trial court's order that alternate jurors be present during deliberations. The court affirmed the district court's denial of Roberts' petition. Roberts v. Carter (6th Cir.2003), 337 F.3d 609. The United States Supreme Court denied appellant's writ of Certiorari. Roberts v. Carter (2004), 540 U.S. 1151, 124 S.Ct. 1150.
{¶18} On October 1, 2004, appellant filed an application for DNA testing. The Guernsey County Prosecuting Attorney filed a report regarding the existence of biological material available for DNA testing on December 5, 2004. On April 6, 2005, appellant was appointed counsel to pursue his application for DNA testing. The trialcourt denied appellant's request on December 14, 2005, concluding that: 1). R.C. 2953.74(C)(1) had been satisfied in that biological material was collected from the crime scene or the victim of the offense and that the material is still in existence; 2). R.C. 2953.74(C)(2)(a) was not satisfied as the testimony at appellant's trial indicated that the sample of biological material does not contain sufficient material to be extracted for a test sample; and 3). Even if there were sufficient biological material to perform DNA testing the results would not be outcome determinative because no fingerprint or hair was attributed to appellant during his trial and the testimony of the witnesses was sufficient to convict appellant even if he were excluded as the source of the hair or fingerprint. This Court affirmed. State v. Roberts, ...
To continue reading
Request your trial