State v. Wells

• Decision Date: 29 July 2021
• Docket Number: 109787
• Parties: STATE OF OHIO, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ANTROINE WELLS, Defendant-Appellant.
• Court: Ohio Court of Appeals

2021-Ohio-2585

STATE OF OHIO, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ANTROINE WELLS, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 109787

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eighth District, Cuyahoga

July 29, 2021

Criminal Appeal from the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Case No. CR-19-637865-A

JUDGMENT AFFIRMED AND REMANDED

Michael C. O'Malley, Cuyahoga County Prosecuting Attorney, and Kelly N. Mason, Eben McNair, and Stephanie Farah, Assistant Prosecuting Attorneys, for appellee.

Joseph V. Pagano, for appellant.

JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION

EILEEN T. GALLAGHER, JUDGE

{¶1} Defendant-appellant, Antroine Wells ("Wells") appeals from his convictions and sentence. He raises the following assignments of error for review:

1. Appellant's convictions were not supported by sufficient evidence and the trial court erred by denying his motion for acquittal.

2. The convictions were against the manifest weight of the evidence.

3. Appellant's constitutional rights were violated when the charges were not dismissed when he was not afforded a speedy trial.

4. Appellant's sentence is contrary to law because the record does not support the imposition of consecutive sentences.

5. The trial court erred by failing to merge all allied offenses of similar import and by imposing separate sentences for allied offenses which violated appellant's state and federal rights to due process and protections against double jeopardy.

{¶ 2} After careful review of the record and relevant case law, we affirm Wells's convictions and sentence. The matter is remanded for the court to issue a nunc pro tunc sentencing journal entry to reflect the imposition of consecutive sentences.

I. Procedural and Factual History

{¶ 3} On February 20, 2018, Wells was named in a six-count indictment in Cuyahoga C.P. No. CR-18-626004-A, charging him with rape in violation of R.C. 2907.02; kidnapping in violation of R.C. 2905.01(A)(4), with a sexual motivation specification; aggravated burglary in violation of R.C. 2911.11(A)(1); burglary in violation of R.C. 2911.12(A)(2); intimidation of a crime victim or witness in violation of R.C. 2921.04(B)(1); and theft in violation of RC. 2913.02(A)(1). The indictment stemmed from alleged incidents involving Wells's ex-girlfriend, Jane Doe, on January 29, 2018, and February 2, 2018.

{¶ 4} On March 6, 2018, the date scheduled for Wells's arraignment, a capias was issued for his arrest. Wells was not brought into custody until February 8, 2019.

{¶ 5} On March 14, 2019, Wells was reindicted in Cuyahoga C.P. No. CR-19-637865-A. The 12-count indictment charged Wells with rape in violation of R.C. 2907.02(A)(2) (Count 1); kidnapping in violation of R.C. 2905.01(A)(4), with a sexual motivation specification (C0unt 2); aggravated burglary in violation of R.C. 2911.11(A)(1) (Count 3); burglary in violation of R.C. 2911.12(A)(2) (Count 4) intimidation of a crime victim or witness in violation of R.C. 2921.04(B)(1) (Count 5); theft in violation of R.C. 2913.02(A)(1) (Count 6); aggravated robbery in violation of R.C. 2911.01(A)(1) (Count 7); criminal damaging or endangering in violation of R.C. 2909.06(A)(1) (Count 8); aggravated burglary in violation of R.C. 2911.11(A)(2) (Count 9); intimidation of a crime victim or witness in violation of R.C. 2921.04(B)(1) (C0unt 10); retaliation in violation of R.C. 2921.05(B) (Count 11); and tampering with evidence in violation of R.C. 2921.12(A)(2) (Count 12).

{16} The new indictment was filed by the state to account for alleged acts committed against Jane Doe and a second victim, T.L., during the time period Wells avoided custody in Case No. CR-18-626004-A Upon the filing of the new criminal indictment, the state dismissed Case No. CR-18-626004-A without prejudice.

{¶ 7} In March 2020, the matter proceeded to a jury trial on Counts 1-6 and 9-12 of the indictment. Counts 7 and 8, the only charges pertaining to T.L., were bifurcated and were to be addressed at a later date.

{¶ 8} At trial, Jane Doe testified that she and Wells were previously in a romantic relationship that spanned approximately four years. Jane Doe ended their relationship in the "summer of 2017." (Tr. 208.) When the relationship ended, Jane Doe avoided Wells and ignored his phone calls and text messages.

{¶ 9} On January 29, 2018, Jane Doe arrived home from work and noticed the smell of cigar smoke. Jane Doe testified that the smell of the cigar smoke caused her to believe that Wells had been inside her home. When Jane Doe went upstairs to ensure her home was secure, Wells suddenly came out of a bedroom and attacked her. According to Jane Doe, Wells then pinned her down and vaginally raped her. Jane Doe testified that she began "screaming telling him to stop, don't do it." (Tr. 222.)

{¶ 10} After the alleged sexual assault occurred, Jane Doe took a shower and went to a previously scheduled doctor's appointment. At that time, Jane Doe reported the sexual assault to her doctor. Thereafter, Jane Doe went to the emergency room for examination and the completion of a rape kit. Jane Doe also filed a formal report with the city of Bedford Police Department. Jane Doe testified that once she reported the criminal incident to the police, she began receiving concerning phone calls and text messages from Wells.

{¶ 11} In November 2018, Wells contacted Jane Doe through a social-media platform using the alias "Chris." Chris offered to pay Jane Doe money for a nude photograph. Jane Doe accepted the offer and scheduled a time for Chris to come to her home to complete the agreed upon transaction. At the time scheduled for Chris's arrival, Jane Doe opened her front door and encountered Wells. Wells was holding a stun gun and directed Jane Doe to go back inside her home. Wells then forced Jane Doe to sign a recantation letter while pointing the stun gun at her. Wells also made threatening statements to Jane Doe, warning her that people he owed money to would "come after [her] and [her] kids." (Tr. 239.) The recantation letter, which was subsequently mailed to the city of Bedford Police Department, stated, in relevant part:

I, [Jane Doe], would like to recant my statement of accusing Antroine Wells of rape, kidnapping, theft, and burglary. That statement is 100 percent false. After reflecting on the incident I am admitting I was wrong. I made an honest mistake. I only told the detectives those things because I was afraid and nothing was done. I thought he would hurt me because of how I hurt him, but he didn't, even what I accused him of. But the truth is he did not rape me nor break into my home. I truly and sincerely apologize to everyone involved in this matter. It was an honest mistake that I regret.

{¶ 12} Jane Doe reiterated that she did not write the recantation letter and that Wells did commit the offenses alleged in the indictment. Jane Doe explained that she did not immediately notify the police that Wells forced her to sign the recantation letter because "he said if I called the police and tell them that he was there, he would find out." (Tr. 242.)

{¶ 13} Detective Shawn Klubnik ("Det. Klubnik") of the city of Bedford Police Department testified that he was assigned to investigate the sexual assault allegations levied against Wells. In the course of his investigation, Det. Klubnik interviewed Jane Doe, photographed her injuries, reviewed certain text messages sent to Jane Doe's cell phone, and collected relevant medical records and physical evidence. Det. Klubnik confirmed that he received a typed recantation letter that contained Jane Doe's signature. Det. Klubnik also testified that he received a phone call from an individual claiming to be Jane Doe's brother. This individual, who identified himself as "Brian," was calling to verify that the police received Jane Doe's recantation letter. Det. Klubnik testified that he found the phone call to be suspicious. When he contacted Jane Doe about the suspicious phone call, Jane Doe confirmed that she does not have a brother named Brian. Det. Klubnik further testified that Wells had a copy of the recantation letter on his person at the time of his apprehension in February 2019.

{¶ 14} At the conclusion of the state's case, defense counsel moved the court for a judgment of acquittal pursuant to Crim.R. 29. The trial court denied the motion and the defense presented its case.

{¶ 15} Wells testified on his own behalf. Wells confirmed that he was romantically involved with Jane Doe for several years. He testified that he moved out of the residence he shared with Jane Doe in the beginning of 2018 due to her infidelity. Although their relationship had ended, Wells explained that he continued to have intercourse with Jane Doe in exchange for money. With respect to the incident alleged to have occurred on January 29, 2018, Wells maintained that he and Jane Doe engaged in consensual intercourse. He testified that Jane Doe was upset when he declined to give her money on this occasion. According to Wells, Jane Doe became increasingly irate when he finally confessed to her that he had more biological children than he had previously disclosed. Wells opined that Jane Doe responded to his lies by pursuing criminal allegations against him.

{¶ 16} Wells testified that after the argument in January 2018, he did not have contact with Jane Doe until they met at his uncle's house in May 2018. Wells stated that he and Jane Doe resolved their differences and engaged in sexual intercourse. Wells testified that Jane Doe also invited him to her house on November 27, 2018. He explained that he and Jane Doe had reached an agreement via a text-message conversation whereby Jane Doe agreed to provide Wells nude photographs of herself in exchange for $500 or $600. Defense counsel introduced "screenshots" of the alleged electronic communications....