State v. Thompson

Decision Date29 October 2014
Docket NumberNo. 2010–1373.,2010–1373.
Citation2014 Ohio 4751,141 Ohio St.3d 254,23 N.E.3d 1096
Parties The STATE of Ohio, Appellee, v. THOMPSON, Appellant.
CourtOhio Supreme Court

Sherri Bevan Walsh, Summit County Prosecuting Attorney, and Richard S. Kasay, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.

Timothy Young, Ohio Public Defender, and Rachel Troutman and Kimberly S. Rigby, Assistant Public Defenders, for appellant.

FRENCH, J.

{¶ 1} This is an appeal as of right by appellant, Ashford L. Thompson, who has been sentenced to death for the aggravated murder of Twinsburg Police Officer Joshua Miktarian. For the reasons below, we affirm Thompson's convictions and sentence.

I. BACKGROUND

{¶ 2} Following the murder of Officer Miktarian, the state charged Thompson with two counts of aggravated murder under R.C. 2903.01(B) and (E). Each count carried three death specifications: purposely killing a law-enforcement officer, R.C. 2929.04(A)(6), killing to escape detection, R.C. 2929.04(A)(3), and killing while under detention, R.C. 2929.04(A)(4). The state also charged Thompson with two counts of escape, two counts of resisting arrest, three counts of tampering with evidence, and one count of carrying a concealed weapon. Every count of the indictment also carried at least one firearm specification.

{¶ 3} Thompson's jury trial commenced in 2010.

A. The State's Case in Chief
1. Rav's Bar

{¶ 4} A little after midnight on July 13, 2008, Thompson picked up his girlfriend, Danielle Roberson, and they drove to Rav's Creekside Tap and Grill ("Rav's Bar"). The bartender, John Jira, recognized Thompson as a regular customer who typically ordered one beer and never caused trouble. That night, Jira served Thompson a single Budweiser draft at 12:30 or 1:00 a.m.

{¶ 5} Rav's Bar patron Steven Bartz testified that he saw a woman and a man, whom he later identified as Thompson, sitting at the bar that night. He said he had heard Thompson making angry comments. According to Bartz, Thompson was drinking a beer, was "slamming his glass on the bar," and "was pretty drunk." Bartz heard Thompson say to his companion, "There's demons in me" and "I will kill any one f* * *er that threatens me." Bartz also testified that Thompson said, "Nobody understands the s* * * I've done and am capable of doing. I can't even talk about it."

2. Traffic Stop

{¶ 6} Around 1:50 a.m. on July 13, Miktarian was en route to the Twinsburg police station. He was wearing a police uniform and driving a marked police cruiser. His police dog, Bagio, was with him.

{¶ 7} Miktarian began following Thompson's car near the intersection of State Route 91 and Glenwood Drive. Another driver, Natalie Spagnolo, testified that she saw a police cruiser turn on its lights and follow a car onto Glenwood Drive that night. The car was playing music so loudly that she could hear it over her own loud music even though her windows were up.

{¶ 8} At about 1:55 a.m., Miktarian called dispatch to report a traffic stop at a residence on "Glenwood near 91." Thompson had pulled into his driveway on Glenwood, and Miktarian pulled into the driveway behind him. Miktarian provided the license plate number—"ITNL." Approximately two minutes later, he requested backup.

{¶ 9} The dispatcher, Christine Franco, ran the license-plate number on the Law Enforcement Data System at 1:55 a.m.

Her search revealed that the owner of the vehicle had a license to carry a concealed firearm. Moments after Miktarian requested backup, Franco reported, "The only thing I know is he has a—he has a right to carry." Miktarian did not respond.

{¶ 10} Officer Patrick Quinn heard Miktarian's backup request over the radio and "figur[ed] something was possibly wrong." He responded, asking Miktarian "what he had." Miktarian did not answer, so Quinn "ran to [his] cruiser and then left the station with [his] lights and sirens activated."

{¶ 11} Moments later, the dispatcher received a phone call from Thompson's next-door neighbor, Mary Spisak. Around 2:00 a.m., Spisak woke to the sound of yelling outside her open window. She heard five popping sounds and called to report "shooting and arguing in the next-door neighbor's yard." The dispatcher relayed this information to Miktarian, but he still did not respond.

{¶ 12} Three other witnesses testified that they had heard popping sounds near 2454 Glenwood Drive around the same time. Two of the witnesses, Douglas Szymanski and Joseph Werling, were stopped in a car at the intersection of State Route 91 and Glenwood Drive when they saw the lights of a police cruiser 200 to 300 feet away and heard four gunshots. They drove onto Glenwood and saw a police cruiser parked in a driveway with its overhead lights on.

{¶ 13} Officers quickly arrived at the scene. Officer Quinn arrived first and saw Miktarian's cruiser with its lights on, but no other vehicles. Another officer arrived and saw Miktarian on the ground next to his cruiser. Miktarian had no vital signs when emergency medical services arrived.

{¶ 14} Thompson's driver's license and insurance card were in Miktarian's front shirt pocket.

3. Thompson's Arrest

{¶ 15} Twinsburg police enlisted the assistance of other local law enforcement to locate Thompson. Around 2:00 a.m., the Bedford Heights Police Department received notice that Thompson had a prior address in their jurisdiction, on Cambridge Drive. Three officers went to investigate.

{¶ 16} Around 2:20 a.m., Sergeant David Sandoval, Officer Anthony Vanek, and Officer Kimberly Callieham arrived at the Cambridge Drive address. They saw three people—two women and one man—standing in the driveway. Vanek also saw a vehicle with the license plate "ITNL" parked inside an open garage at the top of the driveway.

{¶ 17} Vanek began to question one of the women, Bridget Robinson, and she said that she was Thompson's sister. While Vanek was inquiring about Thompson's whereabouts, he heard a loud disturbance inside the house. He realized that the other woman, later identified as Danielle Roberson, had left the driveway.

{¶ 18} Vanek approached the house and opened the screen door; the main door was already open. He saw a man—later identified as Thompson—who had a pair of handcuffs hanging off his right wrist. Vanek confronted Thompson in the kitchen, and a struggle ensued. One officer seized a Kel–Tec 9 mm handgun from the stovetop, and another arrested Thompson and took him into custody.

4. Physical Evidence

{¶ 19} At booking, Sergeant Greg Feketik photographed Thompson, his clothes and shoes, a small cut on his wrist

, and the handcuffs he was wearing, which were marked with Miktarian's badge number. Later forensic testing confirmed the presence of blood with a DNA profile consistent with Miktarian's DNA profile on Thompson's left shoe, watchband, and shirt and on the barrel of the recovered gun.

{¶ 20} Dr. Darin Trelka, then a deputy coroner for Cuyahoga County, performed an autopsy on July 14, 2008. Trelka classified Miktarian's death as a homicide and determined that he died from four gunshot wounds

to the head.

{¶ 21} Officers from the crime-scene unit photographed and documented the scene at Glenwood Drive and collected evidence. They recovered three spent bullets, and the medical examiner recovered a fourth bullet from Miktarian's skull during the autopsy.

{¶ 22} On the driveway, the crime-scene-unit officers found a pair of Miktarian's handcuffs and his Taser, which had been activated but not fired. Miktarian's handgun was still in a triple-retention holster on his duty belt.

{¶ 23} Officers also recovered a broken liquor bottle next to the sidewalk in front of Thompson's house. Two officers observed, but did not collect, a small, yellowish-grey, chewed-up food substance on the driveway. They later believed that the substance was garlic, because a search of Thompson's car uncovered a baggie containing garlic cloves. Detective Jason Kline explained that sometimes persons who have been drinking chew garlic when talking to police to cover the odor of alcohol on their breath.

{¶ 24} Inside Thompson's home, officers found a receipt documenting his purchase of a Kel–Tec 9 mm handgun. The serial number of the gun listed on the receipt matched the number on the gun found at the house on Cambridge Drive, and subsequent ballistics testing confirmed that the spent bullets and shell casings recovered from the crime scene had been fired from that gun.

B. The Defense's Case

{¶ 25} At trial, the defense presented one witness, Danielle Roberson. Roberson testified that at the time of the shooting, she had been dating Thompson for approximately two years.

{¶ 26} According to Roberson, on July 13, Thompson and his friend picked her up at her mother's house a little after midnight. After dropping off Thompson's friend, Thompson and Roberson went to Rav's Bar. Roberson testified that Thompson drank one-half of a beer. She did not recall Thompson being angry or consuming any additional alcohol that night.

{¶ 27} The couple left the bar and headed toward Thompson's house. At the intersection of State Route 91 and Glenwood Drive, Roberson saw a police cruiser to the right. When the light turned green, Thompson turned left and drove the short distance to his driveway. Roberson said she saw the officer make a U-turn as Thompson's car turned the corner, but the cruiser's overhead lights were not on. According to Roberson, the officer pulled into the driveway behind Thompson's car and then turned his lights on.

{¶ 28} Roberson testified that she and Thompson started to get out of the car but then saw the officer approaching, so they stayed in the car. She said that the officer asked Thompson, "[W]hy are you running through my city with all that boom, boom, boom. I ought to rip all this s* * * out of your car." The officer then indicated that he had been following Thompson for two and one-half miles and asked why he had not stopped. The officer took Thompson's driver's license and insurance card and asked whether he had had anything to...

To continue reading

Request your trial
224 cases
  • State v. Stapleton, Case No. 19CA7
    • United States
    • Ohio Court of Appeals
    • September 10, 2020
    ...Ohio St.3d 173, 182, 510 N.E.2d 343 (1987). "An abuse of discretion is more than a mere error of law or judgment." State v. Thompson, 141 Ohio St.3d 254, 23 N.E.3d 1096, 2014-Ohio-4751, 23 N.E.3d 1096, ¶ 91; accord State v. Johnson, 144 Ohio St.3d 518, 2015-Ohio-4903, 45 N.E.3d 208, ¶ 75. I......
  • State v. Washington
    • United States
    • Ohio Court of Appeals
    • March 3, 2022
    ... ... the cumulative effect of the joinder." State v ... Banks, 2015-Ohio-5413, 56 N.E.3d 289, ¶ 64 (8th ... Dist.) at ¶ 66 ... {¶46} ... Moreover, we presume that the jury followed the court's ... instructions. State v. Thompson, 141 Ohio St.3d 254, ... 2014-Ohio-4751, 23 N.E.3d 1096, ¶ 192, citing State ... v. Loza, 71 Ohio St.3d 61, 641 N.E.2d 1082 (1994). The ... trial court in this case instructed the jury as follows: ... Each of the offenses charged in these cases constitute a ... separate and distinct ... ...
  • State v. Graham
    • United States
    • Ohio Supreme Court
    • December 17, 2020
    ...Graham cannot establish prejudice, because there is no evidence that any seated juror actually harbored racial bias. See State v. Thompson , 141 Ohio St.3d 254, 2014-Ohio-4751, 23 N.E.3d 1096, ¶ 234.{¶ 52} Based on the foregoing, we reject proposition of law No. I.C. Improper admission of t......
  • State v. Gideon
    • United States
    • Ohio Court of Appeals
    • June 1, 2021
    ...2015 WL 5010542, ¶ 16. "[W]e presume that the jury followed the [trial] court's instructions." Valentine at ¶ 57, citing State v. Thompson , 141 Ohio St.3d 254, 2014-Ohio-4751, 23 N.E.3d 1096, ¶ 192. This presumption is bolstered by the jury's not-guilty findings in two of the cases that it......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
2 books & journal articles
  • Preliminaries
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Trial Objections
    • May 5, 2022
    ...mitigating circumstances is complex, jurors should not be asked to do so until they have heard all of the evidence . State v. Thompson, 23 N.E.3d 1096, 1121 (Ohio 2014). “The trial court has great latitude in deciding what questions should be asked on voir dire.” A reviewing court will only......
  • Witness
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Trial Objections
    • May 5, 2022
    ...and guns, and counsel made no effort to elicit the information being sought through non-leading questions. OHIO State v. Thompson , 23 N.E.3d 1096, 1135-36 (Ohio 2014). Defendant argues that a prosecutor improperly asked a series of leading questions to a bartender, among other witnesses, a......

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