State v. Davis
| Citation | 62 Ohio St.3d 326,581 N.E.2d 1362 |
| Decision Date | 31 December 1991 |
| Docket Number | No. 90-1070,90-1070 |
| Parties | The STATE of Ohio, Appellee, v. DAVIS, Appellant. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Ohio |
In 1976, Daniel Robert Krebs was engaged in the purchase and sale of automobiles in the city of Elyria under the trade name of Hefflin's Used Cars. Krebs would frequently obtain used automobiles for resale from Donald Kendall. Kendall operated what is known as a "chop shop"--a facility where motor vehicles are reassembled using stolen automotive parts. The extent of the illicit activities conducted by Krebs was not limited to this enterprise, however. In addition to his fencing operation, Krebs, also known as "the old man," was extensively engaged in the trafficking of controlled substances. Much of this activity was conducted in the rear of the shop owned by Kendall and in cooperation with Charles Piazza. In the course of his association with Krebs, Kendall became acquainted with appellant, Raymond E. Davis, in 1976. Kendall knew Krebs to employ appellant whenever a customer of Krebs failed to pay him for a drug purchase. Appellant was also known by Kendall to be associated with Krebs in the manufacture of Phencyclidine ("PCP"). Through their mutual affiliation with Krebs, Kendall sold appellant an automobile which was titled to the wife of appellant. As a result of this transaction, Kendall became aware that appellant was from Chicago, Illinois.
On June 19, 1978, Krebs undertook to complete the sale of a quantity of marijuana which had been previously arranged by Piazza. Prior to the time of the purchase, associates of Krebs warned him that the purchase price appeared to be excessive and that they suspected that the transaction was a "set-up." After the transaction was completed, Krebs was arrested. Although both Krebs and Piazza were prosecuted, Piazza was granted probation while Krebs was sentenced to a period of incarceration of from two to ten years.
As a result of his subsequent incarceration, Krebs became embittered toward Piazza. It was the belief of Krebs that Piazza was an informant for law enforcement agencies and had arranged the drug transaction which led to Krebs's arrest. As a consequence of this belief, Krebs undertook to contract for the murder of Piazza.
In March 1983, appellant and Alvin Powell travelled to the home of Coy Meeks to obtain ether used in the manufacture of PCP. Upon his arrival appellant was informed by Meeks that Krebs had called the residence and needed to talk to appellant regarding a person Krebs wanted appellant to kill. On April 30, 1983, Kendall, Krebs and Piazza met at an L & K Restaurant in Oberlin, Ohio. During the course of conversation among the parties regarding drug transactions, Piazza handed Krebs a sum of money wrapped inside a newspaper. Upon departing the restaurant, Krebs and Kendall returned to Krebs's automobile where Krebs instructed Kendall to count the money and open the trunk. Krebs transferred a bag from the trunk to Piazza's automobile. Kendall proceeded to count the bundle of money which was bound by three rubber bands. The bundle contained $10,000. After departing the restaurant, Kendall and Krebs proceeded up Ohio Route 58 whereupon Krebs began to laugh. When Kendall asked Krebs what was so funny, Krebs replied, "our friend [Piazza] just paid for his own killing."
On May 2, 1983, appellant and Powell departed Chicago for Elyria, Ohio, to obtain ether and peperidine from Krebs. These substances were essential components in the manufacture of PCP. Appellant and his associates had obtained the components from Krebs in the past. The parties to the transaction customarily met at a point equidistant from Chicago and Elyria. However, on this occasion, appellant and Powell travelled the entire distance to Elyria. The reason given to Powell by appellant was that Krebs "had some business to take care of in Elyria."
After arriving at Hefflin's Used Cars, appellant and Powell were directed to Kendall's body shop in order to locate Krebs. Once at the body shop, a conversation among Kendall, Krebs and appellant was overheard by Powell. The conversation involved arrangements which were being finalized "to take care of Chuckie" (Charles Piazza). Following this conversation, appellant, Krebs and Powell returned to Hefflin's Used Cars at approximately 4:00 p.m. While there, Powell viewed a substantial sum of money on a living room table. At approximately 7:30 p.m., appellant and Krebs departed Hefflin's Used Cars while Powell remained behind. Appellant and Krebs returned to the used car lot at approximately 1:00 a.m.
On May 3, 1983, Andrew Settas received a telephone call from Mary Piazza, the wife of Charles Piazza. Mrs. Piazza explained to Settas that Charles Piazza had not returned home the previous evening. Settas responded that he would attempt to locate Charles Piazza. At approximately 7:30 a.m., Settas proceeded to the home of Edith Schneider in order to contact Charles Piazza. After knocking on the door of the Schneider residence and receiving no response, Settas began to leave. However, upon discovering that automobiles belonging to Piazza and Schneider were in the garage and concerned that some misfortune had befallen Piazza, Settas forced open the door to the house and called out Piazza's name. As Settas proceeded through the house he discovered the lifeless body of Piazza on the couch and Schneider dead on the living room floor. Both Piazza and Schneider died as a result of gunshot wounds to the head.
On October 20, 1987, appellant was indicted by the Lorain County Grand Jury on two counts of aggravated murder in violation of R.C. 2903.01(A) () with four and five death penalty specifications respectively, two counts of aggravated murder in violation of R.C. 2903.01(B) (felony murder) with four and five death penalty specifications respectively, one count of conspiracy to commit aggravated murder in violation of R.C. 2923.01(A)(1) and 2923.01(A)(2) and one count of aggravated burglary in violation of R.C. 2911.11(A)(1). Counts Two, Four and Six, relating to aggravated burglary and felony murder, and certain of the specifications to Counts One and Three, similarly related, were subsequently dismissed.
On December 15, 1987, appellant was arraigned in the Lorain County Common Pleas Court. In the course of the proceeding the following exchange between appellant and the trial court transpired:
On January 4, 1988, counsel for appellant filed a motion for discovery wherein appellant sought an order from the court compelling the state:
"To permit the Defendant to inspect and copy or photograph any results or reports of physical or mental examinations, and of scientific tests or experiments, made in connection with the particular case, or copies thereof, available to or within the possession, custody or control of the State, the existence of which is known or by the exercise of due diligence may become known to the prosecuting attorney, including but not limited to results of tests, and reports of the coroner from the autopsies of Charles D. Piazza and Edith D. Schneider, Crim.R. 16(B)(1)(d)." (Emphasis added.)
On January 7, 1988, the motion was granted. On February 26, 1988, appellant filed with the trial court a notice of alibi pursuant to Crim.R. 12.1. On March 7, 1988, a pretrial hearing was held during which counsel for appellant argued that the state had failed to fully comply with the order to compel discovery inasmuch as it had failed to reveal the result of polygraph examinations administered to Settas, Kendall and Powell. Counsel therefore urged the court to order disclosure of the polygraph test results. The trial court denied this motion.
On April 25, 1988, the case progressed to jury selection. During the voir dire of prospective jurors the following exchange occurred between counsel for appellant and juror Clyde McConaughey:
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Leonard v. Warden
...broad discretion in this regard. Id. See, also, State v. Carter (1995), 72 Ohio St.3d 545, 560, 651 N.E.2d 965; State v. Davis (1991), 62 Ohio St.3d 326, 340, 581 N.E.2d 1362. Leonard has failed to show that the trial court abused its discretion and offers a purely speculative claim of prej......
-
State v. John R. Dougherty
......Therefore, the. court decided not to sua sponte dismiss Mr. Swisher. for bias [ 2 ] . The trial court has the authority to. excuse a juror on the basis of bias regardless of whether a. challenge is made by either party. State v. Davis . (1991), 62 Ohio St.3d 326, 581 N.E.2d 1362. The determination. of whether a prospective juror should be disqualified for. bias is a discretionary function of the trial court. Such a. determination will not be reversed on appeal absent an abuse. of discretion. Berk ......
-
State v. Hoffner, 102 Ohio St.3d 358 (OH 7/14/2004), Case No. 2001-0835.
...509 N.E.2d 383, paragraph one of the syllabus; State v. Murphy (1992), 65 Ohio St.3d 554, 583, 605 N.E.2d 884; State v. Davis (1991), 62 Ohio St.3d 326, 351, 581 N.E.2d {¶88} Therefore, we overrule the eleventh proposition of law. VI Independent Sentence Review {¶89} At the penalty hearing,......
-
Bonnell v. Mitchel, No. 00CV250.
...correctly defined "beyond a reasonable doubt" and properly instructed the jury in its deliberations. See, e.g., Ohio v. Davis, 62 Ohio St.3d 326, 581 N.E.2d 1362, 1372 (1991). The claim is therefore d. The trial court improperly instructed the jury on each of the statutory mitigating factor......