State v. Monford

• Decision Date: 30 September 2010
• Docket Number: No. 09AP–274.,09AP–274.
• Citation: 190 Ohio App.3d 35,940 N.E.2d 634
• Parties: The STATE of Ohio, Appellee,v.MONFORD, Appellant.
• Court: Ohio Court of Appeals

190 Ohio App.3d 35

940 N.E.2d 634

2010 -Ohio- 4732

The STATE of Ohio, Appellee,

v.MONFORD, Appellant.

No. 09AP–274.

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Tenth District, Franklin County.

Decided Sept. 30, 2010.

Ron O'Brien, Franklin County Prosecuting Attorney, and Seth L. Gilbert, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.Yeura R. Venters, Franklin County Public Defender, and Allen V. Adair, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.CONNOR, Judge.

[Ohio App.3d 43] {¶ 1} Defendant-appellant, Larue A. Monford (“defendant”), appeals from the judgment of the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas, entered upon a jury verdict convicting him of murder, attempted murder, and felonious assault, all with firearm specifications, and one count of carrying a concealed weapon. For the reasons that follow, we affirm that judgment.

{¶ 2} Defendant's convictions arise from an incident that occurred on the afternoon of February 7, 2008, at a bar known as D# 1 Happy Family, located on St. Clair Avenue, in Franklin County, Ohio. On that date, Alicia Brown went to D# 1 Happy Family to meet Eugene Brown, a local disc jockey, to pick up concert tickets. Upon her arrival, Alicia saw defendant. Although the two had never previously met, they exchanged brief pleasantries. A short while later, Eugene arrived at the bar and he and Alicia sat next to one another and had a few drinks together. Lenora Edwards and Cornell Rhodes were also seated at the bar.

{¶ 3} Shortly before 3:00 p.m., defendant approached the bar and spoke with Eugene. Defendant put down a $20 bill and bought a round of drinks for his “friends” at the bar, telling the bartender, Latayia Cummings to keep the change, which was about $10. Defendant then walked to the back room of the bar and spoke with Antoinette Lee (“Toni”). After conversing for a little while, the two of [Ohio App.3d 44] them returned to the bar's front room. Defendant then approached the bar and inquired about his money. Defendant approached Eugene from behind and demanded that Eugene give him his money. Eugene was still seated next to Alicia. As Eugene turned to face defendant, defendant again demanded his money and shot Eugene in the back. As a result of the gunshot wound, Eugene died at the scene.

{¶ 4} After the gunshot, Alicia stood up and started running toward the bathroom. Defendant fired twice at Alicia. Alicia was struck in the left hip and the right buttock. Defendant then left the bar through the back door, got into his vehicle, and drove away. Frank McKnight, who had been acquainted with defendant off and on for approximately 16 years, witnessed defendant driving away in a vehicle displaying temporary tags.

{¶ 5} In the hours following the shooting, Columbus police received an anonymous tip that pointed to defendant as the shooter. As a result, defendant's photograph was released to the local media and was subsequently aired on the local news.

{¶ 6} At the scene, police recovered three shell casings. The day after the shooting, police located a vehicle at the address listed on defendant's driver's license that matched the general description of the vehicle allegedly driven by the shooter and seen leaving the D# 1 Happy Family bar. Like the vehicle leaving the bar, this vehicle also had temporary tags. The vehicle was registered to Connie Senate. Upon reaching Connie Senate's residence, officers located and arrested defendant.

{¶ 7} Also on February 8, 2008, the day after the shooting, Columbus Police Homicide Detective Steven Glasure went to the hospital and showed Alicia a photo array containing defendant's driver's license photograph. She positively identified defendant as the shooter and marked her initials on defendant's photo.

{¶ 8} Approximately two weeks later, Detective Glasure developed a photo array containing a more recent photograph of defendant and showed that array to Latayia and Cornell. Both positively identified defendant as the shooter.

{¶ 9} On February 15, 2008, defendant was indicted by the Franklin County Grand Jury on one count of murder, one count of attempted murder, and one count of felonious assault. All three offenses were indicted with three-year firearm specifications. Defendant was also indicted on one count of carrying a concealed weapon. At his arraignment on February 20, 2008, defendant entered general pleas of not guilty and Attorney Myron Shwartz was appointed to represent him. Later, on April 24, 2008, the trial court granted leave for defendant to enter written pleas of not guilty by reason of insanity. On that [Ohio App.3d 45] same date, the trial court also appointed Kristen E. Haskins, Psy.D., to interview and evaluate defendant with respect to those pleas.

{¶ 10} Because Attorney Shwartz was in ill health, the trial court appointed Attorney Tracy A. Younkin as co-counsel for defendant in August 2008. A suppression hearing was held on September 3, 2008, regarding defendant's motion to suppress all identification evidence. At the suppression hearing, the state of Ohio offered the testimony of Alicia, Latayia, Lenora, Frank, and Detective Glasure, as well as the testimony of security video surveillance technician Ronnie Williams. Defendant did not offer any witnesses on his behalf.

{¶ 11} During the hearing, Alicia and Latayia both affirmed their identification of defendant as the shooter using the photo arrays previously shown to them after the shooting. Detective Glasure testified that while presenting the photo arrays, he did not indicate to either witness which photo she should select, nor did he indicate whether the suspect was or was not in the array. In addition, Alicia and Latayia both made in-court identifications of defendant. While Lenora had not previously made an out-of-court identification of defendant as the shooter, she identified defendant during the hearing as the person who shot Eugene. Frank also made an in-court identification, asserting that defendant was the person he saw driving away from the bar and the person whom Lenora claimed had shot Eugene.

{¶ 12} Following the hearing, the trial court denied defendant's motion to suppress the identification, finding that the identifications were neither unnecessarily suggestive nor unreliable.

{¶ 13} Prior to the trial, on October 21, 2008, the trial court held a hearing to permit defendant to address any concerns he had with his representation, due to a complaint that he had filed with the bar association. During the hearing, defendant indicated that his issues were mostly with Attorney Shwartz and his on-going health issues. Defendant indicated that he had recently spoken with his other attorney, Attorney Younkin, and that most of the issues had been resolved. The trial court also permitted defendant to address the issue of bond and in fact, set a new bond. Following the hearing, the court subsequently authorized funds for defendant to retain an expert on eyewitness identification. In December 2008, just a few days before trial was scheduled to begin, Attorney Shwartz passed away, leaving Attorney Younkin to proceed without co-counsel.

{¶ 14} Just prior to opening statements, defendant again voiced concerns about his attorney, complaining that the expert witness had been retained only one week prior to trial and that his attorney had not been to see him in the last two weeks. However, upon the court's inquiry, defendant indicated that he was ready to proceed to trial with Attorney Younkin.

[Ohio App.3d 46] {¶ 15} In his opening statement, defendant's counsel put forward an alibi defense, claiming that defendant was not at the bar at the time of the shooting, but instead was at home. Ultimately, however, defendant did not provide any evidence of an alibi. Additionally, counsel for defendant did not mention or put on any evidence with respect to a plea of not guilty by reason of insanity.

{¶ 16} During trial, the state presented the testimony of multiple witnesses, including various police witnesses. Most relevant to this appeal is the testimony of Alicia, Latayia, Cornell, Lenora, Frank, and Detective Glasure.

{¶ 17} Alicia testified that defendant shot Eugene from behind and also shot her in the left hip and the right buttock. She made a positive in-court identification of defendant as the shooter. On cross-examination, Alicia testified that she heard that the suspect's photograph had been shown on the local news but that she did not see his picture on the news until after the incident, and she never heard his name on the news. She also testified that she did not actually see defendant shoot her, since her back was to him as she was running away.

{¶ 18} Latayia testified that she had served defendant approximately three times in the hour and a half prior to the shooting and that he was only a few feet away from her when she served him. Latayia again affirmed her identification of defendant made via a photo array in late February 2008 and also made an in-court identification of defendant as the shooter. On cross-examination, Latayia testified that she saw a gun in defendant's right hand and heard the gunshot, but she did not actually witness defendant shoot Eugene. In addition, Latayia testified that she heard defendant's name on television in connection with the shooting and also saw defendant's photograph on television after he was arrested but before she selected his photograph from the photo array.

{¶ 19} Cornell testified that he had known defendant for a few years and had seen him at other clubs in the past. He testified that defendant greeted him that afternoon with a handshake and a bear hug. He positively identified defendant as the shooter. He also testified that he witnessed defendant point the gun at Alicia and shoot at her.

{¶ 20} Lenora testified that she did not know defendant, but that she witnessed him put a gun in Eugene's back and shoot Eugene. She also saw defendant chase and shoot Alicia. She subsequently saw defendant leave through the back door...