State v. Adams, 2009 Ohio 6491 (Ohio App. 12/8/2009)
| Decision Date | 08 December 2009 |
| Docket Number | No. 05CA2986.,No. 04CA2959.,04CA2959.,05CA2986. |
| Citation | 2009 Ohio 6491 |
| Parties | State of Ohio, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. John M. Adams, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | Ohio Court of Appeals |
James H. Banks and Nina M. Najjar, Dublin, Ohio, for appellant.
Mark E. Kuhn, Scioto County Prosecutor, Portsmouth, Ohio, for appellee.
DECISION AND JUDGMENT ENTRY
{¶1} A Scioto County jury convicted John M. Adams of one count of murder, one count of aggravated burglary, and two counts of kidnapping, all with firearm specifications. These charges stemmed from an incident in which Adams purportedly shot and killed Bobby Burns, the husband of Michelle Burns, his former psychiatric patient. After secretly entering the Burns's home, Adams purportedly killed Mr. Burns, fled the scene, and forced two women at gunpoint to drive him to Kentucky.
{¶2} Initially, Adams contends that the transcript of proceedings below is so deficient and unreliable that he has been deprived of his constitutional right to an effective appeal. However, the specific errors, omissions, and irregularities Adams discovered in earlier versions of the transcript were corrected after we remanded this case to the trial court under App.R. 9. Although the trial court acknowledged that the final trial transcript might still omit proceedings that occurred outside of the jury's hearing, Adams failed to demonstrate that material prejudice resulted from the failure to properly record these proceedings.1
{¶3} Next, Adams argues that the trial court erred by quashing a subpoena duces tecum directing the custodian of records for Marshall University in Huntington, West Virginia to testify on his behalf and bring any records related to Mrs. Burns. However, Adams failed to follow the proper procedure to secure the attendance of an out of state witness under West Virginia Code §62-6A-2 and R.C. 2939.27. Therefore, the trial court properly granted the university's motion to quash.
{¶4} Adams also contends that the court erred by prohibiting him from cross-examining Mrs. Burns regarding her diagnosed personality disorder and excluding from evidence communications between him and Mrs. Burns on the basis of physician-patient privilege. Although the statute creating the privilege contains an exception for "criminal action[s] against a physician," Adams failed to show that any excluded communication was "related to the action" as required by that provision. The trial court did arguably abuse its discretion by preventing Adams from impeaching Mrs. Burns under Evid.R. 616(B) by questioning her about the disorder's impact on her ability to observe, remember, and relate the events surrounding her husband's murder. However, any error the court committed by limiting cross-examination on this subject was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt in light of the overwhelming evidence of Adams's guilt concerning the charges Mrs. Burns testified about.
{¶5} Next, Adams complains that the trial court erred by denying his motions for a mistrial based on the State's failure to timely provide certain discovery and failure to provide other discovery at all. However, Adams never raised many of the arguments he makes here in a motion for mistrial. Moreover, Adams fails to show that the State adversely affected his substantial rights due to its actions or inaction in the discovery process. Therefore, the trial court's decision to deny Adams's motion for a mistrial was not unreasonable, arbitrary, or unconscionable.
{¶6} Adams also argues that the trial court erred by refusing to order the State to provide him with the videotaped police interviews of Amanda Conkel, Cynthia Gray, and Mrs. Burns prior to trial. However, under Crim.R. 16(B)(1)(g) Adams was not entitled to any of the State's witness statements before trial. Instead, once the State completed its direct examination of each witness, Adams had to move the court to conduct an in camera inspection of the witness' statement.
{¶7} Next, Adams contends that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress evidence seized from his van. Because there is some evidence to support the trial court's conclusion that Adams voluntarily consented to the search of his vehicle, he waived the protection of the Fourth Amendment against unreasonable searches. Thus, the trial court properly overruled Adams's motion to suppress.
{¶8} Adams also complains that his conviction for aggravated burglary was against the manifest weight of the evidence because the State presented no evidence that he entered the Burns's home by force, stealth, or deception. He claims that all the evidence adduced at trial shows Mr. Burns invited him into the home. However, the State presented evidence that Adams secretly entered the Burns's back door without their permission, i.e. by stealth. Because the jury could reasonably return a guilty verdict based on the State's version of the events, we cannot say that the jury clearly lost its way and created such a manifest miscarriage of justice that we must reverse the conviction.
{¶9} In addition, Adams claims that his convictions for kidnapping Conkel and Gray were against the manifest weight of the evidence because the State presented no evidence that he removed the women from the location he found them by force, threat, or deception. He insists they voluntarily drove him from Ohio to Kentucky. However, the State presented evidence that Adams ordered the women into Gray's vehicle at gunpoint and forced them to drive him to Kentucky, i.e. by threat. Because the jury could reasonably return a guilty verdict based on the State's version of the events, we cannot say that the jury clearly lost its way and created such a manifest miscarriage of justice that we must reverse the convictions.
{¶10} Adams also argues that the trial court erred by denying his motion for a new trial based on prosecutorial misconduct. However, he fails to show that any of the information the State purportedly withheld from him was material to his defense. Thus, we reject this argument.
{¶11} Finally, Adams contends that his sentence, which includes greater-than-minimum and consecutive prison terms, is void. Because the trial court relied on R.C. 2929.14(B) and (E)(4), which the Supreme Court of Ohio declared unconstitutional in State v. Foster, 109 Ohio St.3d 1, 2006-Ohio-856, 845 N.E.2d 470, we agree. Therefore we vacate Adams's sentence and remand to the trial court for resentencing.
{¶12} In July 2003, the Scioto County grand jury indicted Adams for one count of murder, one count of aggravated burglary, and three counts of kidnapping. All the charges had firearm specifications, and the murder charge carried a capital specification the State later dismissed. Adams pled not guilty to the charges, and the matter proceeded to a jury trial. Although several witnesses testified at length during the trial, only an abbreviated summary of the events is necessary at this point.
{¶13} The State presented evidence of the following version of events. Adams had a sexual relationship with Mrs. Burns when she was his psychiatric patient. Adams learned that the Burns were considering legal action in relation to his conduct. On July 2, 2003, he entered the back door of the Burns's home, without their knowledge and with a gun, and searched for the couple. He found them in an upstairs bathroom — Mrs. Burns was in the bathtub while Mr. Burns sat on the commode. Adams shot Mr. Burns. When Mrs. Burns tried to escape the house, Adams slammed her against a wall and threatened her with a gun. After Mrs. Burns ran to a neighbor's house, Adams fled the scene in his van. He later parked the van and proceeded on foot until he approached Gray and Conkel. Adams told the women he just shot a man and held the women at gunpoint as he instructed them to go to their vehicle. As the women drove Adams to Kentucky, he told them he was having an affair with the woman whose husband he shot. After police captured Adams, he confessed twice to them that he shot Mr. Burns.
{¶14} Adams attempted to argue at trial that Mrs. Burns shot her own husband, that Mrs. Burns's account of Adams kidnapping her was not credible, and that Gray and Conkel voluntarily drove him to Kentucky. The jury found Adams guilty on all counts except for the charge of kidnapping Mrs. Burns. After sentencing, Adams filed this appeal.
{¶15} Adams assigns the following errors for our review:
THE TRIAL COURT ERRED TO THE PREJUDICE OF THE DEFENDANT IN THE ADMISSION OF EVIDENCE SEIZED FROM HIS VAN WITHOUT A WARRANT. [Appellant is unable to expound on this error due to the incompleteness of the transcript.]
To continue reading
Request your trial