State v. Anderson, Appellate Case No. 25689

Decision Date26 September 2014
Docket NumberAppellate Case No. 25689
Citation2014 Ohio 4245
PartiesSTATE OF OHIO Plaintiff-Appellee v. RICKYM ANDERSON Defendant-Appellant
CourtOhio Court of Appeals

(Criminal Appeal from Common Pleas Court)

OPINION

MATHIAS H. HECK, JR., by KIRSTEN A. BRANDT, Atty. Reg. No. 0070162, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, Montgomery County Prosecutor's Office, Appellate Division, Montgomery County Courts Building, P.O. Box 972, 301 West Third Street, Dayton, Ohio 45422 Attorney for Plaintiff-Appellee

STEPHEN A. GOLDMEIER, Atty. Reg. No. 0087553, CHARLYN BOHLAND, Atty. Reg. No. 0088080, 250 East Broad Street, Suite 1400, Columbus, Ohio 43215 Attorneys for Defendant-Appellant

WELBAUM, J.

{¶ 1} Defendant-Appellant, Rickym Anderson, appeals from his conviction and sentence on three counts of aggravated robbery and one count of kidnapping, with gun specifications. Following a jury trial, Anderson was sentenced to a total of 28 years in prison.

{¶ 2} In support of his appeal, Anderson contends that the trial court erred when it overruled his motion to suppress statements made to police and in sentencing him to a prison term that was disproportionate to that of a more culpable co-defendant who pled guilty. Anderson further contends that the trial court erred by sentencing him to consecutive sentences without complying with R.C. 2929.14, and by failing to properly calculate jail-time credit.

{¶ 3} In addition, Anderson contends that the juvenile court erred in transferring his case to adult court, in violation of his rights under the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause, and in violation of state and federal prohibitions against cruel and unusual punishment. Finally, Anderson contends that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel.

{¶ 4} We conclude that the trial court did not err in overruling the motion to suppress, because the evidence at the suppression hearing supports the trial court's conclusion that Anderson knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his Miranda rights.

{¶ 5} We further conclude that the mandatory transfer provisions for juvenile offenders in R.C. 2152.10(A)(2)(b) and 2152.12(A)(1)(b) do not violate due process rights, equal protection rights, or prohibitions against cruel and unusual punishment.

{¶ 6} However, the trial court did err by failing to comply with R.C. 2929.14(C)'s provisions for imposing consecutive sentences, and by failing to properly calculate jail-timecredit. In view of this holding, the issue of the court's alleged error in imposing a disproportionate sentence is moot, because Anderson's sentence will be vacated and the matter will be remanded for a new sentencing hearing. Finally, any alleged ineffectiveness of trial counsel did not prejudice Anderson, because all of his arguments have been considered, with the exception of his trial tax argument, which is moot, due to the vacation of the sentence. Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court will be affirmed in part and reversed in part. Anderson's sentence will be vacated, and this matter will be remanded to the trial court for a new sentencing hearing.

I. Facts and Course of Proceedings

{¶ 7} This case arises from two separate incidents that occurred on April 20, 2012. On the morning of that day, Rickym Anderson and two high school friends, Dylan Boyd and M.H., met at the RTA hub in downtown Dayton.1 At the time, Anderson was sixteen years old. Because the three teenagers had smoked marijuana, they were late for school. Instead of going to school, they began walking, and walked around most of the day.

{¶ 8} At around 3:00 p.m., the three teens went down an alley next to 615 Yale Avenue in Dayton, Ohio, and passed a garage with an overhead door that was partially up. At the time, Boyd was carrying a 38 caliber Smith and Wesson revolver that was black in color, with a wooden handle grip.

{¶ 9} Brian Williams and his girlfriend, Tiesha Preston, were in the garage, smokingmarijuana and talking. Almost immediately after Williams saw the three people walk by the door, Boyd came back. Boyd said, "Don't move," and when Williams tried to run out the back door of the garage, Boyd opened fire. Boyd fired one bullet, which hit Williams in the back and exited through his abdomen.

{¶ 10} Williams ran across the street to a neighbor's house. When he got to the porch, he could see Boyd gesturing for Preston to get into the trunk of a gray Impala automobile that was parked in the driveway at 615 Yale. The keys to the Impala had been left on the trunk of another car that was sitting in the garage. However, the trunk of the Impala could be opened by using a release button located inside the Impala.

{¶ 11} The first neighbors that Williams approached shut the door and refused to help him, but Williams was eventually able to get help from a neighbor up the street. That neighbor took Williams to the hospital, where surgeons removed major parts of his small and large intestines. At the time of the trial, which was held nearly a year after the incident, Williams was still wearing a colostomy bag.

{¶ 12} After shooting Williams, Boyd first asked Preston where the keys to the Impala were. When she said she did not know, he told M.H. to search the Impala. When M.H. could not find the keys, Boyd told Anderson to search. Boyd also told Anderson and M.H. to get whatever they could find. Boyd then said to Preston, "Bitch, come on. Get in the trunk." Transcript of Proceedings, Volume II, p. 288. After Preston got into the trunk, she could hear the teenagers rummaging around in the car, and also heard Boyd tell the others to grab her purse. After about 25 to 30 minutes, Preston heard neighbors talking, and began beating on the trunk. She was then released from the trunk.

{¶ 13} Following the robbery at 615 Yale, Boyd, Anderson, and M.H. went to an abandoned house on Windsor Avenue, which was about a block and a half away from where Williams had been shot. There was no money in Preston's purse; instead, the purse contained only credit cards, identification, a food stamp card, and some cigarettes.

{¶ 14} After smoking the cigarettes, they left the purse in the abandoned house. M.H. then went home, and Boyd and Anderson continued walking. After meeting another high school student, the three teenagers saw a young woman (Star MacGowan) at an apartment building taking out her trash. At that point, Anderson was carrying the gun. Anderson asked MacGowan if she had any money, and threatened her. He told her he was going to "pop her." Transcript of Proceedings, Volume II, p. 351. MacGowan handed over her purse, which contained a lime-green cell phone.

{¶ 15} Just then, another resident of the apartment building came by and heard MacGowan yelling that her purse had been taken. Anderson took the phone out of the purse, dropped the purse, and ran off. The three teenagers ran in different directions.

{¶ 16} The police were called, and were given a description of the three suspects, including their race, type of clothing, weight, and height. Shortly thereafter, Dayton Police Officer, Jeff Hieber, saw Boyd and Anderson walking in the vicinity, wearing clothing that matched the descriptions he had been given. After slowing down to get a better look, Hieber turned his car around and made a left onto Yale Avenue, where the suspects had been heading. When Hieber caught up to Boyd and Anderson, he detained them and ultimately patted them down. Hieber found a lime-green cell phone in Anderson's pocket, and the police subsequently located a gun about 30 to 40 feet away from where Boyd and Anderson were apprehended.None of the witnesses were able to identify Anderson from a photo spread, but they all later identified him at trial.

{¶ 17} Both Boyd and Anderson were detained and were questioned that night by the police. After waiving his Miranda rights, Anderson admitted to his involvement in both robberies, and led police to the abandoned house where Preston's purse had been hidden.

{¶ 18} Anderson was initially charged in juvenile court, but he was subsequently bound over to the general division of the common pleas court for trial as an adult. Anderson was indicted on three counts of aggravated robbery, one count of kidnapping, and one count of felonious assault, with gun specifications for each charge. Following a jury trial, he was found guilty of all charges, other than the felonious assault charge, which pertained to the shooting of Williams. As was noted, the court sentenced Anderson to a total of 28 years in prison. Williams' co-defendant, Boyd, had previously pled guilty, and had received a nine-year prison sentence.

II. Did the Trial Court Err in Overruling the Motion to Suppress?

{¶ 19} Anderson's First Assignment of Error states as follows:

The Trial Court Erred When It Overruled Rickym Anderson's Motion to Suppress His Statements, in Violation of the Fifth And Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution and Article I, Section 10 of the Ohio Constitution (October 23, 2012 Decision, Order and Entry Overruling Defendant Anderson's Motion to Suppress, p. 6).

{¶ 20} Under this assignment of error, Anderson presents two main arguments. Thefirst is that the State failed to prove that he intelligently and knowingly waived his constitutional rights. Anderson's second argument is that the use of deceptive interrogation techniques undermines a vulnerable child's voluntary waiver of rights. We will address each matter separately.

A. Intelligent and Voluntary Wavier of Rights

{¶ 21} In arguing that Anderson's waiver of rights was neither intelligent nor voluntary, Anderson focuses on the fact that he was treated in the same manner as an adult, without recognition of his individual circumstances or of current research and precedent, which indicate that children need greater protection than adults.

{¶ 22} Before addressing these points, we note that the standards for reviewing...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT