State v. Reynolds

• Decision Date: 10 June 1988
• Docket Number: No. 87-CA-98,87-CA-98
• Citation: 550 N.E.2d 490,49 Ohio App.3d 27
• Parties: The STATE of Ohio, Appellee, v. REYNOLDS, Appellant.
• Court: Ohio Court of Appeals

Page 27

49 Ohio App.3d 27

550 N.E.2d 490

The STATE of Ohio, Appellee, v. REYNOLDS, Appellant.

No. 87-CA-98.

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Second District, Greene County.

June 10, 1988.

Syllabus by the Court

1. Lay testimony may be sufficient to permit a jury to infer that a defendant's reason was so impaired by disease or other defect of the mind at the time of the criminal act that he either did not know that such act was wrong or he did not have the ability to refrain from doing that act, the legal definition of "insanity" in Ohio.

2. A mistrial should not be ordered in a criminal case merely because some error or irregularity has intervened, unless the substantial rights of the accused or the prosecution are adversely affected; this determination is made at the discretion of the trial court.

Joseph Fodal, City Prosecutor, for appellee.

Arthur L. Sidell III, Asst. County Public Defender, for appellant.

FAIN, Judge.

Defendant-appellant, William R. Reynolds, appeals from his convictions and sentences for assault, abusing harmful intoxicants, and resisting arrest. Reynolds, who pled in the alternative not guilty and not guilty by reason of insanity, contends that the trial court erred when it withdrew the insanity issue from the province of the jury and refused to instruct the jury concerning the insanity defense. Reynolds also contends that the trial court erroneously permitted statements made by Reynolds in the course of a psychological examination pursuant to R.C. 2945.39 to be used against him on the issue of guilt.

We conclude that the particular statements made during the course of his psychological evaluation, to the introduction of evidence of which Reynolds objected, were relevant to the issue of whether he was legally insane at the time of the offense, so that they were properly admitted in evidence on that issue. However, we agree with Reynolds that there was enough evidence on the issue of his insanity defense to require that it be submitted to the jury with proper instructions. Therefore, the judgment of the trial court will be reversed, and this cause will be remanded for a new trial.

I

One summer night in 1987, around 9:00 p.m., Reynolds was at the home of Nancy Drake. Drake had her eight- or nine-month-old baby boy with her. Drake's brother, Steven Watson, arrived at the home and detected, as soon as he opened the door, the strong smell of enamel spray paint. Upon inquiring, Watson was told by Reynolds that he and Drake were spray-painting a dresser.

A short while later, Watson, who was then in the kitchen, was joined by his sister and Reynolds. Watson told them that the baby should not be in the house because of the paint fumes. At this point, Watson noted that Reynolds was spraying the paint on a sock and putting it to his nose and sniffing it. Watson said that this happened four or five times. Watson testified that Reynolds exhibited all the characteristics of intoxication.

Watson then went across the street and called the police. When Officer Randy Loper responded to Watson's call, he, also, detected a paint odor that was so strong that it hurt his lungs. Loper also testified that Reynolds appeared to be intoxicated. Loper told Reynolds that he was under arrest for abusing harmful intoxicants, whereupon Reynolds told Loper "that he wasn't going to go to jail, that he had just got out of jail and was not going to go back, and that he had been fed up with the cops and he was not going to go to jail."

Loper and Watson both testified that after Loper's attempts to reason with Reynolds failed, Reynolds resisted arrest to the extent of kicking and struggling with Officer Loper. At some point, another police officer, Grover Songer, arrived to assist. Songer took Nancy Drake into custody, and like Loper, encountered violent resistance. The events surrounding the arrest were best described by Officer Loper, as follows:

"Q. While this was taking place, was he saying anything or were you saying anything to him or what?

"A. I can't remember if he was saying anything. I had my hands full as it was.

"Q. What exactly was he doing at that point as you went to the floor?

"A. He was kicking and swinging and I was being kicked in the back.

"Q. By whom?

"A. Ms. Drake.

"Q. Where exactly did Mr. Reynolds kick you and how many times approximately did he kick you?

"A. Several times. I was kicked in the chest, and when I finally got on top of him, I was hit with his arms across the arms and the back and chest area. And when I finally got him to the floor, Officer Songer was able to help me. We got the cuffs on him in front.

"Q. You handcuffed him in front?

"A. I couldn't get his arms behind him. He was fighting too much. I had to settle for just getting the cuffs on the front of him.

"Q. From the time you first grabbed him above the wrist until the time you actually got the handcuffs on him, how many seconds or how many minutes went by approximately?

"A. I tried to talk to him for five minutes to cooperate and not resist. Then when he started resisting, we probably was [sic ] in the bedroom for another two or three minutes.

"Q. After you got the handcuffs on him, describe to the Jury what you did and what happened.

"A. I tried to pick him up. I used my PR-24.

"Q. What is that?

"A. A nightstick, side-handled baton. I tried to use the PR-24 to get him in an arm bar.

"Q. What does that involve?

"A. Basically, you put the long portion of the side-handled baton in his arm and twist him around and try to lift him up. It is easier to handle a person or carry a person out of the house that way.

"Q. Were you able to do that?

"A. For a little while.

"Q. Then what happened?

"A. He kept spinning and spinning out of it. Then, I tried picking him up physically, and he just kept swinging, like this, and kicking.

"Q. For the record, you are indicating that he raised his hands?

"A. Yes. He had the cuffs in front of him. It is best to get them behind, if you can, but we were only able to get them in the front. And he was using his hands swinging.

"Q. Did he make contact with you?

"A. Yes.

"Q. Where did he actually touch you?

"A. In the chest and arm area.

"Q. What was he doing with his feet at this time?

"A. When he was on the floor, he was kicking, and when he was standing up, he was still trying to kick, one foot at a time, toward us. He was just, basically, going wild and running around and trying to get away. Eventually, we just had to carry him out.

"Q. Who helped carry him?

"A. Well, I had to drag him for part of the way, because Officer Songer had his hands full with Nancy Drake, trying to control her. So, I drug [sic ] him out partially. I got him outside. I tried to stand him up again, tried to walk him to the cruiser, and he just continued to spin around and try to get out of my hold, and we were just spinning around in the yard. Finally, I had to put him back on the ground and had to drag him to the cruiser. Officer Songer and myself had to lift him up and put him in the cruiser.

"Q. Did he calm down after he was in the cruiser?

"A. No, he was hitting and kicking inside the cruiser door, and yelling and screaming.

"Q. Did he calm down after you took him back to the police department?

"A. No, sir.

"Q. What happened after you got him back to the Fairborn Police Department?

"A. Sgt. Gardner had arrived on the scene prior to his going. He followed me into the station. Inside, we got him inside the station and took him directly back to the cell, patted him down and took him directly back to the cell so we didn't have to fight him anymore. Got him back there. The whole time, he was screaming and yelling that he was going to kick my ass. He was asking Sgt. Gardner if he would give William Reynolds five minutes with me. He wanted five minutes with me in the cell. He was just wild.

"Q. I know this may be hard for you to say, but can you say, up to the time you got him to the cruiser, how many times did he actually swing at or attempt to hit you and make contact, and by that, I'm also including, too, legs and arms or both?

"A. I would say he probably attempted 25 or 30 times to strike me. How many times he did strike me through the fight and everything, I can't remember how many times he did strike me, but he just continually kicked and swung his arms."

Police Sgt. Gardner also testified. He testified that he had observed Reynolds on a number of occasions, and that Reynolds behaved in a reasonable way when he was not sniffing paint, but was a "wild man" when he was sniffing paint.

Dr. Jasmine Edwards, the licensed psychologist who examined Reynolds pursuant to R.C. 2945.39, testified that Reynolds had a long history of treatment in psychiatric treatment facilities and chemical dependency treatment facilities. Dr. Edwards testified that Reynolds is on two medications, Stelazine and Cogentin, both of which are antipsychotic drugs that are sometimes used with individuals who experience hallucinations or delusions. She testified that it was her understanding that Reynolds had been diagnosed as a schizophrenic, and that schizophrenia is a confused mental state in which the schizophrenic experiences difficulties in adjusting his perceptions of the world to what is actually going on around him. She also testified that schizophrenics experience those symptoms sporadically, "so it is not a condition that will constantly have symptoms appearing in the person."

Dr. Edwards, who was called by Reynolds, testified on cross-examination as follows:

"Q. All right. And as a result of your speaking to him and your evaluation of him [Reynolds], did you form an opinion as to whether he was suffering from an actual mental illness or legal insanity at the time of the incident in this particular case?

"A. My judgment is that William [Reynolds] is psychologically troubled but not insane."

Dr. Edwards testified that although she did not make a diagnosis, it was her belief that the chemicals...