State v. Sheldon Paterson

• Decision Date: 23 November 1999
• Docket Number: 99-LW-5259,99 CA 18
• Parties: STATE OF OHIO, Plaintiff-Appellee v. SHELDON PATERSON, Defendant-Appellant Case
• Court: Ohio Court of Appeals

STATE OF OHIO, Plaintiff-Appellee v. SHELDON PATERSON, Defendant-Appellant

No. 99 CA 18

99-LW-5259 (5th)

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Fifth District Coshocton

November 23, 1999

Civil Appeal from the Court of Common Pleas, Case No. 83 CR 68

Hon John W. Wise, P. J. Hon. W. Scott Gwin, J. Hon. William B Hoffman, J.

For Plaintiff-Appellee: BRIAN A. REALI ASSISTANT PROSECUTOR 239 North Fourth Street Coshocton, Ohio 43812

For Defendant-Appellant: SHELDON PATERSON, PRO SE #177-420 15708 State Route 78-W Cladwell, Ohio 43724

OPINION

Wise J.

Appellant Sheldon Paterson appeals the decision of the Coshocton County Court of Common Pleas that denied his motion to vacate and/or set aside or modify sentence. The following facts give rise to this appeal. On July 30, 1983, appellant and his brother Donald Patterson attacked and beat their brother Danny Patterson. As a result of the beating, Danny Patterson died on August 6, 1983. Both appellant and his brother Donald Patterson were charged with the murder of Danny Patterson. On November 10, 1983, a jury found appellant guilty of the murder of his brother. Appellant filed a direct appeal to this court on issues of weight of the evidence, prejudicial joinder, improper venue and prosecutorial misconduct. We affirmed appellant's conviction on October 11, 1984. Appellant filed a motion for new trial, in the trial court, on June 14, 1984. The trial court denied appellant's motion and we affirmed this decision on October 31, 1985. Appellant thereafter filed a petition for postconviction relief on March 12, 1985. In his petition, appellant claimed the trial court should have conducted an evidentiary hearing; defense counsel should have re-instated his motion to have the judge removed from the case; he received ineffective assistance of counsel because the co-defendant's defense counsel was threatening appellant's witnesses and his own defense counsel failed to call certain witnesses to testify on his behalf; the state committed prosecutorial misconduct; and defense counsel failed to retrieve records to establish the witnesses that testified for the state committed perjury. The trial court denied appellant's petition for postconviction relief. We affirmed the trial court's decision. Finally, appellant filed a motion for delayed appeal pursuant to State v. Murnahan (1992), 63 Ohio St.3d 60 in which he raised numerous issues including: relief from joinder, change of venue, denial of right to a speedy trial, improperly admitted statement of Tim Stowers and other acts evidence, prosecutorial misconduct and ineffective assistance of appellate counsel. We again affirmed appellant's conviction. Appellant is now before this court on an appeal of another motion for postconviction relief he filed in the trial court on September 20, 1996. The trial court denied appellant's petition on August 3, 1999. Appellant sets forth the following assignments of error for our consideration:

I. THE TRIAL COURT ERRED WHEN IT DISMISSED BY PREJUDICE AND BIAS, BECAUSE THEY HAD TO BE FORCED TO RULE AFTER OVER A TWO YEAR DELAY, FORCED BY THE COURT OF APPEALS.

II. THE COURT DISMISSED POST CONVICTION WITHOUT HEARING AFTER SEEING MEDICAL RECORDS THAT WAS (SIC) HIDDEN BY THE STATE AND COURT BEFORE AND DURING THE TRIAL, RECORDS THAT SHOWED (SIC) THAT APPELLANT WAS SUFFERING FROM BRAIN DAMAGE, BEING TREATED BY SEVERAL DOCTORS, ON MEDICATION, (SIC) AND INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF TRIAL COUNSEL.

III. THE COURT ERRED WHEN IT DISMISSED WITHOUT A HEARING CONCERNING DENIAL THE RIGHT TO CALL EYEWITNESSES IN DEFENSE.

IV. THE TRIAL COURT ERRED WHEN IT DISMISSED WITHOUT A HEARING, WHERE THE STATE DENIED APPELLANT HIS CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO A PRELIMINARY HEARING BEFORE THE TRIAL.

I, II, III, IV

We will address all four of appellant's assignments of error simultaneously. In his First Assignment of Error, appellant contends the trial court erred when it dismissed his petition for postconviction relief, without a hearing, on his claim that he received ineffective assistance of counsel. Appellant alleges, in his Second Assignment of Error, that the trial court erred in not conducting a hearing on his petition for postconviction relief because medical records were concealed by the State of Ohio and defense counsel did not know the existence of these records at the time of trial. In his Third Assignment of Error, appellant contends counsel was ineffective for failing to call Helen Thrasher, Linda Body and Sheila Kay (Bradford) Goodrich as these witnesses could have testified, at trial, that appellant received brain damage before murdering his brother. Finally, appellant contends, in his Fourth Assignment of Error, that the trial court erred in dismissing his petition for postconviction relief, without conducting a hearing, on the State of Ohio's failure to conduct a preliminary hearing. In support of all four assignments of error, appellant maintains the trial court should have conducted an evidentiary hearing prior to ruling on his petition for postconviction relief. In reviewing whether the trial court erred in denying a petition for postconviction relief, without an evidentiary hearing, we apply an abuse of discretion standard. State v Watson (Feb. 17, 1998), Butler App. No. CA97-07-145, unreported, appeal dismissed (1998), 82 Ohio St.3d 1413, citing State v. Chafin (March 25, 1999), Franklin App. No. 98AP-865, unreported, at 2. In order to find an abuse of discretion, we must determine that the trial court's decision was unreasonable, arbitrary or unconscionable and not merely an error of law or judgment. Blakemore v. Blakemore (1983), 5 Ohio St.3d 217, 219. An evidentiary hearing is not automatically required for every petition for postconviction relief. State v. McGuire (April 20, 1998), Preble App. No. CA97-06-015, unreported, appeal dismissed (1998), 83 Ohio St.3d 1428. The Ohio Supreme Court recently stated that: Pursuant to R.C. 2953.21(C), a trial court properly denies a defendant's petition for postconviction relief without holding an evidentiary hearing where the petition, the supporting affidavits, the documentary evidence, the files, and the...