State v. Debord

Citation2023 Ohio 4204
Docket NumberC. A. 29709
Decision Date22 November 2023
PartiesSTATE OF OHIO Appellee v. CHRISTOPHER DEBORD Appellant
CourtOhio Court of Appeals

Trial Court Case No. 2022 CR 00888 (Criminal Appeal from Common Pleas Court)

Pamela L. Pinchot, Attorney for Appellant

Mathias H. Heck, Jr., by Ricky L. Murray, Attorney for Appellee

OPINION

WELBAUM, P.J.

{¶ 1} Appellant, Christopher Debord, appeals from his convictions for aggravated murder, aggravated robbery aggravated burglary, grand theft of a motor vehicle tampering with evidence, and having weapons while under disability following a jury trial and a bench trial in the Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas. In support of his appeal, Debord claims that all of his convictions were against the manifest weight of the evidence. Debord also claims that the trial court erred by allowing the State to impeach one of its own trial witnesses using a prior inconsistent statement and by allowing certain photographs of the deceased victim to be admitted into evidence. In addition, Debord claims that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object or properly object to those evidentiary errors. Debord further asserts that the trial court erred by failing to suppress statements he had made during a police interview and claims that the cumulative effect of that error and the aforementioned evidentiary errors warrants a reversal of his conviction. Lastly, Debord claims that the indefinite sentencing scheme applied by the trial court during his sentencing is unconstitutional. For the reasons outlined below, Debord's judgment of conviction will be affirmed.

Facts and Course of Proceedings

{¶ 2} On May 2, 2022, a Montgomery County grand jury returned a 17-count indictment charging Debord with four counts of aggravated murder, two counts of aggravated robbery, two counts of aggravated burglary, two counts of felony murder, two counts of felonious assault, one count of grand theft of a motor vehicle, three counts of tampering with evidence, and one count of having weapons while under disability. The counts for aggravated murder, aggravated robbery, aggravated burglary, felony murder, and felonious assault included three-year firearm specifications. The indicted counts were broken down as follows.

Aggravated Murder: 4 counts - unclassified felony
1. R.C. 2903.01 (B) (aggravated robbery/deadly weapon) 2. R.C. 2903.01(B) (aggravated robbery/serious physical harm)
3. R.C. 2903.01(B) (aggravated burglary/ physical harm)
4. R.C. 2903.01(B) (aggravated burglary/deadly weapon)
Aggravated Robbery: 2 counts - first-degree felony
1. R.C. 2911.01(A)(1) (deadly weapon)
2. R.C. 2911.01(A)(3) (serious physical harm)
Aggravated Burglary: 2 counts - first-degree felony
1. R.C. 2911.11(A)(1) (physical harm)
2. R.C. 2911.11(A)(2) (deadly weapon)
Felony Murder: 2 counts - unclassified felony
1. R.C. 2903.02(B) (felonious assault/serious physical harm)
2. R.C. 2903.02(B) (felonious assault/deadly weapon)
Felonious Assault: 2 counts - second-degree felony
1. R.C. 2903.11(A)(1) (serious physical harm)
2. R.C. 2903.11(A)(2) (deadly weapon)
Grand Theft: 1 count - fourth-degree felony
1. R.C. 2913.02(A)(1) (motor vehicle)
Tampering with Evidence: 3 counts - third-degree felony
1. R.C. 2921.12(A)(1) (alter/destroy cell phone) 2. R.C. 2921.12(A)(1) (alter/destroy shell casings)
3. R.C. 2921.12(A)(1) (alter/destroy Honda CRV)
Having Weapons While Under Disability: 1 count - third-degree felony
1. R.C. 2923.13(A)(3) (prior felony drug conviction)

{¶ 3} The charges stemmed from allegations that on February 13, 2022, Debord shot and killed his friend, Joshua Shortt, while inside Shortt's Germantown residence. It was also alleged that Debord stole items of property from Shortt, including Shortt's vehicle, and that Debord tampered with evidence, i.e., Shortt's cell phone, the shell casings from the shooting, and Shortt's vehicle.

{¶ 4} Following his indictment, Debord pled not guilty to all the charges and specifications and thereafter filed a motion to suppress. In the motion to suppress, Debord argued for the suppression of statements that he made during an interview with Sergeant Nathan Wale of the Germantown Police Department and Detective Gregory Stout of the Tactical Crime Suppression Unit.[1] Debord claimed that his statements to those officers should be suppressed because he did not knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waive his Miranda rights during the interview. Debord also claimed that his statements were coerced by Sgt. Wale and Det. Stout's making false promises of leniency in exchange for his providing information about Shortt's murder.

{¶ 5} After holding a suppression hearing and reviewing Debord's video-recorded police interview, the trial court overruled Debord's motion to suppress. Debord's case proceeded to a four-day jury trial. All the indicted counts and specifications were tried to the jury except for the count of having weapons while under disability, which was tried to the bench. The following is a summary of the testimony and evidence that was presented at Debord's jury trial.

Short's Last Communication and the Discovery of Shortt's Body

{¶ 6} On Sunday, February 13, 2022, Shortt's mother text-messaged 29-year-old Shortt to ask if he was going to watch the Bengals play in the Super Bowl that evening. Shortt sent his mother a text message back saying that he was going to invite his friend "Stretch" over to his house to watch the game. Shortt's mother then offered to purchase Shortt and his friend some chicken wings and nachos for delivery to Shortt's house. In response, Shortt told his mother that he would let her know in 30 minutes when to order the food. However, Shortt never contacted his mother.

{¶ 7} The next day, Shortt's mother sent Shortt a text message wishing him a happy Valentine's Day and asking if he was okay. Shortt's mother again received no response from Shortt. The lack of response worried Shortt's mother, so she decided to drive to Shortt's Germantown residence the next morning, February 15, 2022. When she arrived at Shortt's residence, Shortt's mother noticed that her son's red Honda CRV was not in the driveway. She thereafter used her set of keys to get into Shortt's house, which was locked and secure.

{¶ 8} Once inside the house, Shortt's mother fed Shortt's cat and looked around. On the second floor of the house, Shortt's mother saw a silver box containing tattoo supplies and some clothes that she did not recognize as belonging to Shortt. As she was getting ready to leave the house, she glanced down into the basement and noticed a twin mattress turned upside down on the basement floor. She went down into the basement and saw a black quilt spread out on the floor with something underneath it. Thinking it was dirty clothes, Shortt's mother lifted a corner of the quilt and saw her son with dried blood on his face and his head in a pool of blood. She immediately called Shortt's father and then 9-1-1.

Investigation at Shortt's Germantown Residence and Clark Gas Station

{¶ 9} After Shortt's mother discovered her son's body, the police investigated and collected evidence at Shortt's residence. During that investigation, the officers discovered three bullet holes in the basement wall near Shortt's body and a nine-millimeter shell casing underneath Shortt's body. In Shortt's backyard, the police discovered an Amazon box with small holes that were consistent with the size of BB gun pellets. The police also discovered packaging material for a BB gun in a trash can outside of Shortt's residence and a manual to a BB gun in Shortt's bedroom closet.

{¶ 10} In addition to that evidence, the police discovered that some of Shortt's possessions, including his cell phone and red Honda CRV, were missing from the residence. In response, the Montgomery County Regional Dispatch Center issued a dispatch for all law enforcement agencies in the area to be on the lookout for Shortt's vehicle. Later that night, a Dayton police officer located Shortt's vehicle at a Clark gas station. The police officer saw two males, later identified as Debord and Dustin Cooper, exit Shortt's vehicle and enter the gas station. The officer was able to apprehend Cooper in the gas station, but Debord left the scene in a black Chevrolet Equinox driven by Debord's friend, John Wilson.

John Wilson

{¶ 11} The police eventually tracked down and interviewed Wilson regarding his interactions with Debord, who Wilson knew as "Stretch." During his video-recorded interview, Wilson told the police that, the day before the February 15th gas station incident, Debord had come over to his house and told him that he (Debord) had robbed and shot someone. Video evidence from the Clark gas station and Wilson's trial testimony confirmed that on February 15th, Wilson followed the red Honda CRV containing Debord and Cooper to the Clark gas station while driving a black Chevrolet Equinox. State's Ex. No. 180. Wilson testified that he and Debord left the gas station in the Equinox after Cooper got arrested and then abandoned the Equinox around the corner. Wilson testified that Debord's friend, Crista Sawvell, thereafter picked them up and took them to her residence.

Crista Sawvell

{¶ 12} Sawvell testified at trial and confirmed that she had picked up Debord and Wilson on the night of February 15, 2022, and taken them to her residence on Blackwood Avenue. Sawvell testified that Debord, who she also knew as "Stretch," kept most of his belongings at her residence. Sawvell estimated that Debord spent the night at her residence at least one or two days a week. Sawvell described her residence as a "safe place" for Debord and explained that it was a...

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