State v. Jones

• Decision Date: 23 September 2021
• Docket Number: 2020-0368
• Citation: 182 N.E.3d 1161,166 Ohio St.3d 85
• Parties: The STATE of Ohio, Appellant, v. JONES, Appellee.
• Court: Ohio Supreme Court

166 Ohio St.3d 85

182 N.E.3d 1161

The STATE of Ohio, Appellant,

v.JONES, Appellee.

No. 2020-0368

Supreme Court of Ohio.

Submitted March 31, 2021

Decided September 23, 2021.

Joseph T. Deters, Hamilton County Prosecuting Attorney, and Ronald W. Springman Jr., Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellant.

Timothy Young, Ohio Public Defender, and Peter Galyardt, Assistant Public Defender, for appellee.

DeWine, J., announcing the judgment of the court.

{¶ 1} Earl Jones shot and killed Kevin Neri. Finding that Jones acted with prior calculation and design, a jury convicted Jones of aggravated murder under R.C. 2903.01(A). The court of appeals reviewed the evidence, drew its own inferences therefrom, and concluded that the evidence was insufficient to show that Jones acted with prior calculation and design. As a result, it reversed the aggravated-murder conviction and discharged Jones from further prosecution for that crime.

{¶ 2} The court of appeals erred. In reviewing whether evidence is sufficient to establish the prior-calculation-and-design element of aggravated murder, a court must consider whether the evidence, when viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution, supports a finding that a defendant acted with advance reasoning and purpose to kill. The court of appeals failed to properly apply this standard and instead conducted its own weighing of the evidence. In this case, a reasonable juror could properly find that Jones acted with prior calculation and design. We reverse the court of appeals’ judgment to the contrary.

I. Background

A. An ongoing feud culminates in a deadly shooting

{¶ 3} Earl Jones and Kevin Neri didn't much like each other. The link connecting the two men was Cyerra Prather. Jones had fathered a child with Prather, but their relationship did not last. Prather eventually began dating Neri, who moved into her home.

{¶ 4} To call the relationship between Neri and Jones combative would be to put it mildly. Jones harassed Neri through text messages and social media, often using racial epithets. And Neri gave as good as he got, including taunting Jones by claiming to be a better father. The two men would argue when Jones came to Prather's house to pick up or drop off their child. More than once, Prather's neighbors reported the disturbance to the police. The situation became so fraught that Prather and her family tried to minimize the contact between the two men, arranging for Neri to be out of the house when Jones came to pick up the child or ensuring the exchanges went as quickly as possible. The two men also developed a habit of regularly scheduling fistfights—often at a time and location away from Prather's home. But the fights amounted to nothing: Neri would wait at the agreed-upon location and Jones would never show.

{¶ 5} The simmering animosity boiled over on the day of the shooting. That morning, Jones arranged to pick up his child the next day for visitation. And Neri, on learning Jones's intentions, scheduled yet another fight. Jones later changed his plans, and it was agreed that he would pick up the child at 8:00 p.m. that night rather than the next afternoon. He then texted Neri to ask whether he would be there that evening. Neri replied that he would be there, and the two men agreed to meet at an intersection six houses away from Prather's home.

{¶ 6} Jones drove to Prather's house and parked his car on the wrong side of the street in a no-parking zone immediately in front of the house. Jones pocketed a loaded gun as he got out of the car, leaving the engine running and the driver's-side door open. Neri was standing on the house's front porch when Jones arrived. The two men began walking toward each other and Neri took off his sweatshirt as he approached. Jones immediately pulled out his gun and shot Neri. Neri tried to flee but Jones fired two more shots as he was running, ultimately bringing Neri to the ground. After shooting Neri, Jones drove to the Hamilton County Sheriff's Department, where he turned himself in. Meanwhile, paramedics transported Neri to the hospital, where he died.

{¶ 7} Jones was indicted on charges of aggravated murder, murder, felony murder—each with specifications—and carrying a concealed weapon. At trial, Jones claimed that he shot Neri in self-defense, but the jury was unpersuaded and found Jones guilty on all counts in the indictment.

B. The court of appeals reverses Jones's aggravated-murder conviction and discharges him from prosecution on that count

{¶ 8} Jones appealed to the First District Court of Appeals, raising a number of assignments of error. Relevant to our analysis here, Jones argued that his conviction for aggravated murder was not supported by sufficient evidence, because the evidence adduced at trial did not prove that he had acted with prior calculation and design. 2020-Ohio-281, 151 N.E.3d 1059, ¶ 9. A majority of the appellate panel agreed, finding that the evidence showed that Jones purposely killed Neri but did not establish that Jones did so after engaging "in a studied consideration of the method, means, or location of the killing." Id. at ¶ 16.

{¶ 9} In reaching its decision, the court of appeals assessed the evidence using the three guideposts for examining prior calculation and design that this court set out in State v. Taylor , 78 Ohio St.3d 15, 19, 676 N.E.2d 82 (1997). The Taylor framework asks: "(1) Did the accused and victim know each other, and if so, was that relationship strained? (2) Did the accused give thought or preparation to choosing the murder weapon or murder site? and (3) Was the act drawn out or ‘an almost instantaneous eruption of events’?" Id ., quoting State v. Jenkins , 48 Ohio App.2d 99, 102, 355 N.E.2d 825 (8th Dist.1976).

{¶ 10} Although the court of appeals found that Jones and Neri had a strained relationship, 2020-Ohio-281, 151 N.E.3d 1059, at ¶ 14, it concluded that the remaining evidence did not support a finding of prior calculation and design under Taylor . First, it determined the text messages between Jones and Neri showed that the men had planned to meet for a fistfight away from Prather's home when Jones was scheduled to pick up his child. Thus, Jones did not expect Neri to be present when he arrived at Prather's home and it "defie[d] logic" for the jury to find that Jones planned to kill Neri at that location "with witnesses around and his child present." Id. at ¶ 21. Second, the court of appeals construed Jones's choice to pocket his loaded firearm as he left his vehicle as indicating only "instantaneous deliberation" and not a design to kill Neri. Id. at ¶ 23. It rationalized this conclusion by noting that Jones frequently carried a weapon and had once had a gun stolen from his car. Id. Third, the court reasoned that a jury could not infer prior calculation and design from the evidence establishing that Jones arrived at Prather's house, shot Neri, and drove away to turn himself in, because the shooting took place in a matter of minutes and showed only Jones's anger in the moment. Id. at ¶ 24.

{¶ 11} As a result of this appraisal of the evidence, the First District reversed Jones's conviction for aggravated murder.

Id. at ¶ 26, 81. Because the double-jeopardy protection bars retrial when a conviction has been reversed for insufficient evidence, see State v. Thompkins , 78 Ohio St.3d 380, 387, 678 N.E.2d 541 (1997), citing Tibbs v. Florida , 457 U.S. 31, 47, 102 S.Ct. 2211, 72 L.Ed.2d 652 (1982), the court of appeals discharged Jones from further prosecution on the aggravated-murder count. Id. at ¶ 81.

{¶ 12} One judge wrote in dissent, reasoning that a rational trier of fact could find that the evidence—when viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution—established that Jones acted with prior calculation and design. In particular, Jones's role in planning the fistfight, his decision to leave his car running and the driver's-side door open, and his choice to bring a firearm with him when exiting his vehicle all supported the jury's verdict. Id. at ¶ 83-90 (Bergeron, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part).

{¶ 13} As to the other assignments of error raised by Jones, the majority of the appellate panel concluded that the trial court had made several evidentiary errors and that those errors were not harmless. 2020-Ohio-281, 151 N.E.3d 1059, at ¶ 28-58, 68-80. Consequently, it reversed Jones's convictions for murder and felony murder and remanded the case for a new trial on these counts. The court of appeals affirmed Jones's conviction for carrying a concealed weapon. Id. at ¶ 81.

{¶ 14} The state appealed the First District's reversal of Jones's aggravated-murder conviction, and we accepted jurisdiction. 159 Ohio St.3d 1413, 2020-Ohio-3275, 147 N.E.3d 655.

II. Analysis

{¶ 15} The state raises several propositions of law, all of which can be distilled into a single question: did the state present evidence of prior calculation and design sufficient to support Jones's conviction for aggravated murder under R.C. 2903.01(A) ? Reviewing the record and applying the appropriate standard of review, we conclude that the state met its burden and that the First District erred in reversing Jones's aggravated-murder conviction.

A. Sufficiency of the evidence and prior calculation and design

{¶ 16} An appellate court's task when reviewing whether sufficient evidence supports a defendant's conviction is well-settled and familiar. The reviewing court asks whether " ‘after viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime proven beyond a reasonable doubt.’ " State v. McFarland , 162 Ohio St.3d 36, 2020-Ohio-3343, 164 N.E.3d 316, ¶ 24, quoting State v. Jenks , 61 Ohio St.3d 259, 574 N.E.2d 492 (1991), paragraph two of the syllabus, superseded by constitutional amendment on other grounds as stated in State v. Smith , 80 Ohio St.3d 89, 102, 684 N.E.2d 668 (1997), fn. 4. But it is worth remembering what is not...