State v. Brown
| Decision Date | 31 March 2016 |
| Docket Number | No. 2014–L–037.,2014–L–037. |
| Citation | 62 N.E.3d 943 |
| Parties | STATE of Ohio, Plaintiff–Appellee, v. Nathaniel S. BROWN, Defendant–Appellant. |
| Court | Ohio Court of Appeals |
Charles E. Coulson, Lake County Prosecutor, and Karen A. Sheppert, Assistant Prosecutor, Painesville, OH, for plaintiff-appellee.
Aaron T. Baker, Willoughby, OH, for defendant-appellant.
{¶ 1} Appellant, Nathaniel S. Brown, appeals from the judgment of the Lake County Court of Common Pleas convicting him of murder, in violation of R.C. 2903.02(A), and gross abuse of a corpse, in violation of R.C. 2927.01(B).
{¶ 2} We reverse appellant's conviction for murder on several bases; first, over objection, the state's expert was permitted to present unreliable, and therefore irrelevant, technical evidence and testimony which inculpated appellant and therefore prejudiced his defense. Further, over objection, the trial court erroneously published a copy of the transcript of appellant's interview with police for the jury to use as a “listening aid.” Because there was a material difference between the transcription and an alternative, reasonable interpretation the jury could give accord a pivotal statement made by appellant during the interrogation, the trial court's decision to allow the jury to review the transcripts was an abuse of discretion resulting in prejudicial error. Finally, these errors, in conjunction with multiple other errors which occurred in the course of the jury trial, support a finding of cumulative error which violated appellant's right to a fair trial.
{¶ 3} We additionally vacate appellant's conviction for gross abuse of a corpse. A careful review of the evidence demonstrates the state failed to introduce sufficient evidence to prove this crime beyond a reasonable doubt. Thus, as will be discussed in greater detail below, appellant's conviction for gross abuse of a corpse is vacated, and his conviction for murder is reversed, and the matter is remanded for further proceedings.
{¶ 4} On Saturday, April 9, 2011, William Andrew Putzbach went to a party at his brother Erik's house with an acquaintance, Kyle Basinger. Putzbach and Basinger had a few drinks and mingled with other partygoers. Later in the evening, however, Basinger was acting strangely, following people at the party for no reason and staring blankly at others. Erik found out Basinger had identified himself as an assassin who had not yet killed anyone. Erik ultimately asked Putzbach to take Basinger home. Putzbach and Basinger subsequently left the house, to which Putzbach later returned by himself and remained overnight.
{¶ 5} On Sunday afternoon, Putzbach, accompanied by Basinger, went house-hunting with his friend, Nicole Knecht. According to Nicole, the two men were friendly and were getting along fine.
{¶ 6} On Sunday night, Basinger was with appellant and Ronald Shirer at appellant's and Shirer's apartment, in the Willoughby Hills Towers, playing video games. Basinger used Shirer's phone to call Putzbach to set up a marijuana deal. Surveillance cameras on the 12th floor of the apartment building captured appellant, Basinger, and Shirer walking from appellant's apartment toward an elevator. Basinger had a roll of duct tape around his right forearm.
{¶ 7} The three men proceeded into the parking lot of the complex, where they found Putzbach in his vehicle. All three entered the vehicle; Shirer sat in the front passenger seat, Basinger behind Putzbach, and appellant in the backseat of the passenger side. After a brief discussion, Basinger brandished a chain and looped it around Putzbach's neck. Putzbach struggled but, due to the tautness of the chain, was unable to speak. Basinger eased the pressure long enough for Putzbach to give the men his ATM personal identification number; he then reapplied the pressure. Putzbach struggled to loosen the chain, but was pulled into the rear of the vehicle. According to appellant, Basinger transferred the chain to one hand, produced a claw hammer, and repeatedly beat Putzbach in the head until he stopped moving.
Basinger then bound Putzbach's hands with the tape and took his wallet and phone.
{¶ 8} After the incident, Basinger, with appellant in the passenger seat, left the apartment complex in Putzbach's car. Shirer followed in his vehicle. Putzbach remained in the backseat of his vehicle, bound, bleeding, and motionless. They drove to Kirtland, Ohio, where Shirer filled up his gas tank using cash stolen from Putzbach. The group then drove to Willoughby Hills and they pulled into a metropark. According to appellant, Basinger stopped the vehicle and discarded various items from Putzbach's trunk. Appellant stated Basinger then moved Putzbach from the backseat to the trunk. Appellant maintained he neither assisted nor touched Putzbach's body. The men eventually returned to appellant's apartment.
{¶ 9} Bank records revealed that two unsuccessful attempts were made to withdraw money from Putzbach's account that night. The records further demonstrated the attempts were made from an ATM located near the Willoughby Hills Towers apartment complex.
{¶ 10} Over the next several days, Basinger continued to drive Putzbach's vehicle. Nichole Knecht, a friend of Putzbach who accompanied him and Basinger to look at a house on April 10, was working at Burger King on Tuesday April 12, where she witnessed Basinger, alone, driving Putzbach's vehicle. The restaurant's manager later advised Knecht that Putzbach's mother, Cathy Fayne, had visited Burger King to determine whether anyone at the establishment had seen him. Fayne indicated she could not locate Putzbach, a former employee of the restaurant, and inquired whether anyone had seen the young man. Knecht subsequently contacted Fayne. Several days later, she met with Fayne and explained she had observed Basinger driving Putzbach's vehicle. Knecht ultimately filed a police report.
{¶ 11} Jordan Barnes, another friend of Putzbach, also contacted police after observing Basinger driving Putzbach's vehicle. Barnes indicated he encountered Basinger in the city of Euclid. He followed Basinger for some time, but ultimately lost track of the vehicle.
{¶ 12} After Putzbach was reported missing from work on Monday and Tuesday, April 11 and 12, a “missing-persons” investigation was initiated. Detective John Malady, of the Willowick Police Department, noted strange purchase activity relating to Putzbach's bank account, and traced certain large purchases, occurring on April 13, to the Walmart in Eastlake, Ohio. He later discovered that Putzbach's cell phone went inactive on April 11. The detective reviewed the surveillance footage from the Eastlake Walmart, which disclosed two male individuals making purchases with Putzbach's credit card. He subsequently called Erik Putzbach to determine whether he could identify either individual. Erik Putzbach identified one of the males as Basinger.
{¶ 13} Detective Malady retrieved Basinger's cell phone number from Fayne and left a voice message for him to contact the officer. Basinger ultimately returned the call and met with Detective Malady's partner, Detective Prochazka. Basinger told the detective the last time he saw Putzbach was on Tuesday, April 12, 2011. Basinger indicated the two spoke but did not meet. Because police knew there were no incoming or outgoing calls from Putzbach's cell phone after April 11, Basinger's statement did not match existing evidence. Arrangements were made for Basinger to meet with Detective Malady on the morning of April 17, 2011, but Basinger failed to show.
{¶ 14} Investigators subsequently noticed Basinger had an open Facebook account; one friend listed in the account was Ron Shirer, who Detective Malady recognized from the Walmart surveillance videos. Investigators found Shirer's last known address was his grandparent's home. After contacting Shirer's grandparents, investigators learned Shirer did not reside at their home; the grandparents, however, described an apartment complex where Shirer had been residing in Willoughby Hills, Ohio at Willoughby Hills Towers.
{¶ 15} On April 18, 2011, officers went to the Willoughby Hills Towers to question Shirer regarding Basinger's and/or Putzbach's whereabouts. As they entered the complex, they immediately noticed Putzbach's 1995 Pontiac Grand Am in the parking lot. They peered inside the vehicle and observed the back seat was completely covered with a comforter; they also noticed duct tape in the vehicle's back window. Given the pending investigation, officers began to process the vehicle.
{¶ 16} Upon opening the vehicle's trunk, officers discovered Putzbach's beaten, bound, and bloodied body, face down. As their search progressed, officers discovered a significant amount of blood in the back seat. They also recovered a four-foot long, linked chain and a blood-stained roll of duct tape. Appellant and Shirer, who were both in their apartment, were immediately arrested and taken into custody. During a subsequent search of the apartment, officers seized a hammer of which appellant acknowledged ownership. On the same day, officers recovered Putzbach's belongings from the metropark at which they were discarded a week earlier.
{¶ 17} Blood-spatter analysis was conducted on the interior of Putzbach's vehicle by forensic scientist, Curtiss Jones. Jones opined that the spatters, located on the interior surface of the rear-passenger window and door, came from multiple impacts. Impact spatter was also noted on the back-vent window of the rear-passenger compartment. He further opined that the blood source was located in the rear passenger compartment at the time of the impacts. And, given the circular-to-oval shape of the spatters, the source would have been at or near a 90–degree angle, perpendicular to that window and situated at approximately the same height of the window. Jones further opined that, based upon the size and shape of the spatter, the blood was moving from left...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Rac
... ... Echevarria , 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 105815, 2018-Ohio-1193, 2018 WL 1578825, 27, citing State v. Dean , 146 Ohio St.3d 106, 2015-Ohio-4347, 54 N.E.3d 80, 135 ; State v. Brown , 2016-Ohio-1358, 62 N.E.3d 943, 71 (11th Dist.). "If * * * the jury instructions incorrectly state the law, then an appellate court will conduct a de novo review to determine whether the incorrect jury instruction probably mislead [sic] the jury in a manner materially affecting the complaining ... ...
-
State v. Sutton
... ... Phillips was charged with: Counts 1 through 4 alleged attempted murder, in violation of R.C. 2923.02 and 2903.02 with respect to the victims Kenneth Tolbert ("Tolbert"), Christopher Lovelady ("Lovelady"), Kevin Tolbert ("K. Tolbert"), and Leonard Brown ("Brown"); Counts 5 through 10 alleged felonious assault in violation of R.C. 2903.11 with respect to the same victims; Counts 11 and 12 alleged attempted felonious assault in violation of R.C. 2923.02 and 2903.11 with respect to those same four victims; Page 5 Counts 13 and 14 alleged attempted ... ...
-
State v. Williams
... ... { 76} Williams offers that the jury should have been instructed that "a defendant's conduct as an accessory after the fact is not criminal and cannot constitute criminal conduct." It is true that an "accessory after the fact" is not a crime offense in Ohio. State v ... Brown , 2016-Ohio-1358, 62 N.E.3d 943, 148 (11th Dist.). It is also true that the state's theory of the case and the evidence presented in support was based on aiding and abetting and not an accessory after the fact. Page 24 { 77} "A trial court has discretion to determine whether the evidence ... ...
-
State v. Whitman
... ... 1, 119 S.Ct. 1827, 144 L.Ed.2d 35 (1999). {54} Whether jury instructions correctly state the law is a legal issue that an appellate court reviews de novo. See , e ... g ., State v ... Dean , 146 Ohio St.3d 106, 2015-Ohio-4347, 54 N.E.3d 80, 135; see also State v ... Brown , 2016-Ohio-1358, 62 N.E.3d 943, 71 (11th Dist.). Although a trial court has "broad discretion to decide how to fashion jury instructions," the trial court must "'fully and completely'" give the jury all instructions that are "'relevant and necessary for the jury to weigh the evidence and ... ...