State v. Nicholas

Decision Date26 June 2020
Docket NumberNo. 2018-CA-25,2018-CA-25
Citation2020 Ohio 3478,155 N.E.3d 304
Parties STATE of Ohio, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Donovan Asher NICHOLAS, Defendant-Appellant
CourtOhio Court of Appeals
OPINION

WELBAUM, J.

{¶ 1} Defendant-Appellant, Donovan Asher Nicholas, appeals from his conviction of one count of aggravated murder, in violation of R.C. 2903.01(A)(F) /2929.02(A). The conviction arose from the murder of Heidi Taylor on April 6, 2017.

{¶ 2} Nicholas was found guilty by a jury of two unclassified felonies, aggravated murder and murder; Nicholas was also found guilty of one- and three-year firearm specifications on both offenses. After the trial court merged the aggravated murder and murder, the State elected to proceed on the aggravated murder. The court then sentenced Nicholas to life with parole eligibility after serving 25 years and to a three-year firearm specification. The firearm specification was to be served consecutively and prior to the sentence for aggravated murder.

{¶ 3} In support of his appeal, Nicholas raises several assignments of error. Nicholas contends that the juvenile court abused its discretion and violated due process by disregarding uncontroverted evidence and transferring this case out of the juvenile court for adult prosecution. Regarding the adult prosecution, Nicholas maintains that the trial court violated his right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment by disregarding his youthfulness and denying his request for an "irresistible impulse" jury instruction related to his plea of not guilty by reason of insanity.

{¶ 4} Also concerning the adult prosecution, Nicholas argues that the trial court denied his right to due process and a fair trial by instructing the jury that an act by someone with multiple personalities is voluntary "so long as * * * the personality then controlling his behavior was conscious and his actions were a product of his own violation." Nicholas additionally contends that he was denied effective assistance of counsel because his counsel presented evidence of his relationship with the victim without connecting it to Nicholas's mental illness. Finally, Nicholas maintains that the trial court erred by imposing statutorily unauthorized costs.

{¶ 5} After reviewing the records in both the juvenile and trial court cases, we find Nicholas's assignments of error without merit, except for part of one assignment of error pertaining to statutory fees. For the reasons explained below, the judgment of the trial court will be affirmed in part and reversed in part, and this cause will be remanded to the trial court for removal of appointed counsel fees from the cost bill and clarification of two other items of fees assessed.

I. Facts and Course of Proceedings

{¶ 6} For ease of discussion, we will first discuss the juvenile court proceedings. We will then follow with a recitation of the relevant proceedings in adult court.

A. Juvenile Court

{¶ 7} On April 7, 2017, Nicholas was charged with delinquency in the Champaign County Court of Common Pleas, Juvenile Division (Case No. 2017 JA 60), for allegedly causing the death of Heidi Taylor on April 6, 2017, in Urbana, Ohio. At the time, Taylor was the live-in girlfriend of Nicholas's father, Noah Shane Nicholas (known as Shane). Nicholas was born on July 9, 2002, and he was 14 years old on the day of the crime.

{¶ 8} According to the statement of Detective Ryan Black of the Champaign County Sheriff's Office (which was attached to the complaints), the Sheriff's Office received a 911 call from Nicholas on April 6, 2017. During the call, Nicholas said that he had killed his "mother." The statement also indicated that Taylor had been stabbed and shot. Nicholas told responding officers that he had multiple personality disorder and that "Jeff," who was "in his head," had killed Taylor.

{¶ 9} An initial appearance of counsel and detention hearing was held on April 7, 2017, at which time Nicholas denied the charges. The court ordered Nicholas to be placed at the Central Ohio Youth Center ("COYC") pending further proceedings. After Nicholas's counsel moved for a competency evaluation, the court ordered Daniel Hrinko, Psy.D., a doctor of forensic and clinical psychology, to conduct a competency examination. The court also appointed Megan Scott as guardian ad litem ("GAL") for Nicholas.

{¶ 10} On April 14, 2017, the State filed a motion to transfer the matter to the court of common pleas, with a request for a hearing. During a pretrial hearing on April 14, 2017, Nicholas's counsel orally moved for a competency hearing. The court stated that the transfer motion would be held in abeyance until competency was established, and it scheduled a competency hearing for June 15, 2017. Subsequently, Nicholas filed a written motion to evaluate his competency to stand trial.

{¶ 11} After Dr. Hrinko found Nicholas competent to stand trial, Nicholas's counsel filed a "Waiver of Probable Cause Hearing." When the competency hearing was held, the State stipulated to Dr. Hrinko's report and asked the court to find Nicholas competent. Nicholas's counsel, Nicholas, and his father also told the court that they accepted the report as evidence of Nicholas's competence. The court then concluded, based on the statement attached to the complaints, that probable cause existed for the charged offenses of aggravated murder and murder. In addition, the court held that due to the finding of probable cause and Nicholas's age of 14 at the time of the offenses, Nicholas was eligible for discretionary bindover to the common pleas court. As a result, the court ordered the GAL to conduct a social history and investigation; Dr. Hrinko was also ordered to conduct an amenability evaluation.

{¶ 12} On September 5, 2017, Nicholas's counsel asked the court to order an amenability and treatment evaluation with Dr. Amy Hoisington-Stabile, M.D., of the Ohio State University. According to the motion, Dr. Hrinko's report of May 7, 2017, "concluded that Juvenile is suffering from Dissociative Identity Disorder, but that he is amenable providing he receives proper treatment. However, Hrinko, not being a medical professional, was not able to prescribe or recommend a treatment plan for Juvenile." After finding that Nicholas was seeking treatment rather than another amenability evaluation, the court ordered that Nicholas be transported for evaluation by Dr. Hoisington-Stabile on September 8, 2017. However, on September 11, 2017, Nicholas's counsel filed a motion to reschedule the amenability hearing, stating:

In addition to other possible witnesses, Donovan [Nicholas] needs to present three (3) expert witnesses at his amenability hearing: (1) Dr. Hrinko to testify as to his amenability; (2) a psychiatrist to testify as to his/her recommended treatment protocol; and, (3) an employee of the Department of Youth Services to testify as to the availability of the recommended treatment protocol. Dr. Hrinko is available, but despite significant effort on counsel's part, we have been unable to obtain a child psychiatrist to treat Donovan.
We have contacted, or attempted to contact, no less than six (6) child psychiatrists to set an appointment. (See Appendix)1 * * *

{¶ 13} Per the defense request, the amenability hearing was continued until October 31, 2017. In the meantime, the court denied a motion to transport Nicholas for treatment with a nurse practitioner, concluding that "[d]ue to the severity of this matter, the Court does not feel it is appropriate for a nurse practitioner to make a medication decision."

{¶ 14} At the amenability hearing, the parties stipulated to the admissibility of four exhibits: six factual stipulations (A-1); Dr. Hrinko's psychological evaluation (A-2)2 ; the GAL report (A-3); and the coroner's report on the postmortem examination of Taylor (A-4).

{¶ 15} According to the testimony at the amenability hearing, Nicholas called 911 on April 6, 2017, to report that he had stabbed and shot a person in the head and that she was dead. He identified the person as his mother. On arrival, the police found blood inside the living room, down the hallway into the dining room, inside several surfaces in the kitchen, and on a staircase leading up to the second floor. Amenability Tr. at p. 35-36. On the second floor, officers found Taylor's body on a bed in a bedroom. Id. at p. 36. A firearm was located on the bed, and Taylor was missing artificial fingernails, some of which were found on the first floor of the house, which indicated a struggle. Id. at p. 40, 41, 53, and 54. The police also found a bloody knife on the kitchen table. Id. at p. 44. The postmortem examination of Taylor revealed 62 to 64 sharp force entry wounds on her body, as well as a gunshot wound to her right frontal scalp. At least 35 of the sharp-force entries were on Taylor's upper extremities, and she had defensive wounds as well. Id. at p. 61.

{¶ 16} When the police arrived, Nicholas was in the kitchen, with a wound to his leg. Id. at p. 37. After being taken to the hospital, Nicholas was interviewed by Detective Glenn Kemp of the Champaign County Police Department. According to Nicholas's account, he returned home from school on April 6 and took a nap. After awakening, he cleaned his room, and a second personality of his named "Jeff the Killer" emerged. Jeff was an anime character with whom Nicholas was familiar. Id. at p. 22.3 Jeff changed clothes, donning a white shirt and black pants, went downstairs to the kitchen and obtained a knife from the knife drawer. He then went into the bathroom and, using a lancet needle, cut his face upward from the corners of his mouth like an exaggerated smile.4 Id. at p. 22-23. After doing that, Jeff took the knife, went to an area adjacent to the stairwell that led to the upstairs of the residence, and waited for Taylor to come down. Id. at p. 23. Taylor was a long-time girlfriend of Nicholas's father, Shane, and lived in the same household with Nicholas, who called...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • State v. Cunningham
    • United States
    • Ohio Court of Appeals
    • September 30, 2022
    ...and the Tenth District have recently addressed this same issue and reached the same conclusion. See State v. Nicholas, 2020-Ohio-3478, 155 N.E.3d 304, ¶ 74-78 (2d Dist.), appeal allowed 161 Ohio St.3d 1439, 2021-Ohio-375, 162 N.E.3d 822; and State v. L.A.B., 10th Dist. Franklin No. 20AP-120......
  • State v. Nicholas
    • United States
    • Ohio Supreme Court
    • December 2, 2022
    ...his case to the adult court, but the court of appeals rejected that argument and affirmed Nicholas's convictions. 2020-Ohio-3478, 155 N.E.3d 304, ¶ 5.[1] {¶ 2} The legal issues presented in this appeal concern the standards and procedures that apply to a juvenile court's discretionary trans......
  • State v. Consiglio
    • United States
    • Ohio Court of Appeals
    • June 29, 2022
    ...defense, the legislature removed this component from the law in 1990. State v. Nicholas, 2nd Dist. No. 2018-CA-25, 2020-Ohio-3478, 155 N.E.3d 304, ¶ 90, appeal allowed, 161 Ohio St.3d 1439, 2021-Ohio-375, 162 N.E.3d 822, ¶ 90 (appeal allowed on other grounds). {¶20} At trial, two psychologi......
  • State v. Griffin, WD-20-081
    • United States
    • Ohio Court of Appeals
    • September 10, 2021
    ...that are "'directly related to the court proceedings and are identified by a specific statutory authorization.'" State v. Nicholas, 2020-Ohio-3478, 155 N.E.3d 304, ¶ 170 (2d Dist), appeal allowed, 161 Ohio 1439, 2021-Ohio-375, 162 N.E.3d 822, quoting State v. Christy, 3d Dist. Wyandot No. 1......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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