State v. Lewis
Opinion
[Cite as State v. Lewis, 2011-Ohio-5392.]
Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA
JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 96234
STATE OF OHIO PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE
vs.
CAMERON LEWIS DEFENDANT-APPELLANT
JUDGMENT: AFFIRMED
Criminal Appeal from the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Case No. CR-537874
BEFORE: Rocco, J., Boyle, P.J., and Keough, J.
RELEASED AND JOURNALIZED: October 20, 2011
-i- 2 ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT
John T. Castele 1310 Rockefeller Building 614 West Superior Avenue Cleveland, Ohio 44113
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
William D. Mason Cuyahoga County Prosecutor
BY: Erica Barnhill Assistant Prosecuting Attorney The Justice Center 1200 Ontario Street Cleveland, Ohio 44113
KENNETH A. ROCCO, J.:
{¶ 1} Defendant-appellant Cameron Lewis appeals from his conviction for
aggravated theft. Upon a review of the record, we affirm.
{¶ 2} On June 11, 2010, appellant was indicted on one count of burglary in
violation of R.C. 2911.12(A)(1); one count of intimidation of a crime victim or witness in
violation of R.C. 2921.04(B); and one count of theft in violation of R.C. 2913.02(A)(1).
Appellant pled not guilty to the indictment. Prior to the commencement of trial, the state
dismissed the intimidation charge and appellant waived his right to a jury trial. The case
proceeded to a bench trial on November 3, 2010. 3 {¶ 3} Angela Allen testified that on April 27, 2010, she resided in an apartment
located at East 71st Street and Park Avenue with her husband, Preston Allen, her ten
year-old son, David Anderson, and her fourteen year-old daughter. On that day a
recently purchased flat-screen television was located in the living room of her apartment.
Angela explained that during the early morning hours of the day in question, she went to
sleep following an overnight visit to the hospital. Before retiring, she gave David
permission to play with a friend down the street. She directed him to lock the door on
his way out. Angela then went to bed after taking a prescription drug to assist her with
sleep. Her husband also slept nearby.
{¶ 4} When Angela awoke, she noticed that the television was missing. She
testified that she did not grant anybody permission to come into her home that day or to
take the television.
{¶ 5} Angela’s son, David, testified next. He confirmed that on April 27, 2010,
he returned home from being at the hospital with his mother and stepfather and that he
asked whether he could visit a friend down the street.
{¶ 6} Later at his friend’s house, the friend’s uncle Jeff told David and his young
friend to clean the garage. Also at the friend’s house at the time were the appellant and
a pregnant girl, whose name was unknown to David. Later while cleaning the garage,
David’s pants became wet, which prompted him to return home to change his clothes. 4 {¶ 7} As David was walking near his home, he witnessed appellant carrying the
flat-screen television covered with a white sheet. David’s testimony was unclear as to
whether he saw appellant carrying the television before or after he had changed his wet
pants; whether he saw appellant leaving David’s home or merely on the street carrying the
television; and as to the level of involvement of Jeff and the pregnant girl. David’s
testimony, nonetheless, was clear and unwavering that appellant was the individual he
saw carrying the television on the day in question.
{¶ 8} David further testified, and Detective Joel Campbell confirmed, that he
positively identified appellant in a photo array as the individual carrying the flat-screen
television.
{¶ 9} Finally, David testified that the day prior to this incident, Jeff was at
David’s house with David’s stepfather and Jeff observed the new flat-screen television in
the living room.
{¶ 10} Based upon the aforementioned evidence, the trial court found appellant not
guilty of burglary, but guilty of aggravated theft. The court later sentenced appellant on
November 30, 2010, to one year of community control sanctions.
{¶ 11} Appellant now appeals his conviction with the following assignment of
error:
“I. The defendant’s conviction was against the manifest weight of the
evidence.” 5 {¶ 12} Appellant argues in his sole assignment of error that his conviction for
aggravated theft is not supported by the manifest weight of the evidence. We find that
appellant’s argument is without merit.
{¶ 13} In considering a challenge to the manifest weight of the evidence, the
reviewing court examines the entire record, weighs the evidence and all reasonable
inferences, and determines whether in resolving conflicts in the evidence, the trier of fact
clearly lost its way and created such a manifest miscarriage of justice that the judgment
must be reversed. State v. Leonard, 104 Ohio St.3d 54, 2004-Ohio-6235, 818 N.E.2d
229, ¶81. The discretionary power to grant a new hearing should be exercised only in the
exceptional case in which the evidence weighs heavily against the judgment. State v.
Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380, 387, 1997-Ohio-52, 678 N.E.2d 541. Moreover, this court
must remain mindful that the weight of the evidence and the credibility of the witnesses
are matters primarily for the trier of fact to assess. State v. DeHass (1967), 10 Ohio
St.2d 230, 227 N.E.2d 212, paragraph one of the syllabus.
{¶ 14} Upon review of the record, we cannot conclude that the trial court lost its
way. The evidence demonstrated that appellant knowingly obtained control of the
television without the consent of the owners. Angela testified that she purchased a
flat-screen television for $600. When she went to sleep that morning the television was
present in her living room. When she awoke later that morning, she discovered that her 6 new television was missing, and she had not authorized or invited anyone other than her
family in her home on the day in question.
{¶ 15} David testified that he saw appellant walking down the street with a flat-
screen television covered by a white sheet. Admittedly, the testimony of the ten year-old
boy was unclear on certain points. David’s testimony, however, identifying appellant as
the individual carrying the television was clear and unwavering. Furthermore, the trial
court, which is in a better position to determine witness credibility, believed David’s
testimony in this regard. Keeping in mind that the weight of the evidence and the
credibility of the witnesses are matters primarily for the trier of fact to assess, we find
appellant’s conviction for aggravated theft is not against the manifest weight of the
evidence. See State v. DeHass, supra.
It is ordered that appellee recover from appellant costs herein taxed.
The court finds there were reasonable grounds for this appeal.
It is ordered that a special mandate issue out of this court directing the common
pleas court to carry this judgment into execution. The defendant’s conviction having
been affirmed, any bail pending appeal is terminated. Case remanded to the trial court
for execution of sentence.
A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to
Rule 27 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure.
______________________________ 7 KENNETH A.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
2011 Ohio 5392 (State v. Lewis) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.