State v. Wintermute

2012 Ohio 3292
CourtOhio Court of Appeals
DecidedJuly 20, 2012
Docket24815
StatusPublished

This text of 2012 Ohio 3292 (State v. Wintermute) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State v. Wintermute, 2012 Ohio 3292 (Ohio Ct. App. 2012).

Opinion

[Cite as State v. Wintermute, 2012-Ohio-3292.]

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY, OHIO

STATE OF OHIO :

Plaintiff-Appellee : C.A. CASE NO. 24815

vs. : T.C. CASE NO. 11CRB4453

CHRISTOPHER WINTERMUTE : (Criminal Appeal from Municipal Court) Defendant-Appellant :

.........

OPINION

Rendered on the 20th day of July, 2012.

John Danish, City Attorney (Atty. Reg. No. 0046639); Amy B. Musto, Asst. City Prosecutor, Atty. Reg. No. 0071514, 335 W. Third Street, Room 372, Dayton, OH 45402

Attorneys for Plaintiff-Appellee

Zachary Bushatz, Atty. Reg. No. 0083972, 2190 Gateway Drive, Fairborn, OH 45324 Attorney for Defendant-Appellant

GRADY, P.J.:

{¶ 1} Defendant Christopher Wintermute appeals from his conviction and sentence

for assault in violation of R.C. 2903.13(A).

{¶ 2} On May 14, 2011, Defendant was helping his father move out of a house that

his father had been renting with two roommates, Anthony Nelson and Harry Stoner. While 2

Defendant and his father were carrying a bed boxspring down a flight of stairs, Nelson and

Defendant’s father got into a verbal altercation and then a shoving match. According to

Nelson, Defendant hit Nelson twice in the back of his head while Nelson was fighting

Defendant’s father, resulting in a lump on Nelson’s head the size of a golf ball.

{¶ 3} Nelson called the police to report the assault by Defendant. Officer Bozarth

responded to the scene and spoke with Nelson and Stoner. Defendant and his father left

before Officer Bozarth arrived.

{¶ 4} On May 16, 2011, Nelson filed a criminal complaint in Dayton Municipal

Court. Defendant was charged with assault in violation of R.C. 2903.13(A), a first degree

misdemeanor. Following an August 11, 2011 bench trial, the trial court found Defendant

guilty of assault and sentenced him to 180 days in jail, which the court suspended, 20 hours of

community service in lieu of fines, and one year of supervised probation. Defendant also was

ordered to complete an anger management program.

{¶ 5} Defendant filed a notice of appeal raising two assignments of error.

{¶ 6} First Assignment of Error:

{¶ 7} “APPELLANT RECEIVED INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL

AT TRIAL.”

{¶ 8} On June 17, 2011, Susan Souther, an attorney with the Montgomery County

Public Defender’s Office, filed a notice of appearance as Defendant’s attorney. However,

Attorney Souther did not appear to represent Defendant on the day of trial. Rather, according

to Defendant, another attorney from the Public Defender’s Office showed up and represented 3

him at trial.1 Defendant contends that he “had prepared going to trial with Attorney Souther,

who knew the facts of Appellant’s case.” Brief, p.9. Defendant argues that Attorney

Souther’s failure to appear for trial establishes ineffective assistance of counsel. We do not

agree.

{¶ 9} Counsel’s performance will not be deemed ineffective unless and until

counsel’s performance is proved to have fallen below an objective standard of reasonable

representation and, in addition, prejudice arises from counsel’s performance. Strickland v.

Washington (1984), 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674. To show that a defendant

has been prejudiced by counsel’s deficient performance, the defendant must affirmatively

demonstrate to a reasonable probability that were it not for counsel’s errors, the result of the

trial would have been different. Id.; State v. Bradley, 42 Ohio St.3d 136, 538 N.E.2d 373

(1989). “A reasonable probability is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the

outcome.” Strickland, 466 U.S. at 694. Further, the threshold inquiry should be whether a

defendant was prejudiced, not whether counsel’s performance was deficient. Strickland.

{¶ 10} Defendant does not specify how he was prejudiced by Attorney Souther’s

failure to appear, to the extent that a different result would otherwise have occurred. Absent

a showing of prejudice, we cannot find ineffective assistance of counsel. Further, the fact

that Defendant did not have the counsel of his choosing represent him at trial does not

establish the requisite prejudice. In Thurston v. Maxwell, 3 Ohio St.2d 92, 93, 209 N.E.2d

204 (1965), the Ohio Supreme Court wrote:

1 The transcript identifies Defendant’s trial counsel as “unidentified” or “the defense.” 4

The right of an accused to select his own counsel is inherent only in

those cases wherein such accused is employing the counsel himself. The right

to have counsel assigned by the court does not impose a duty on the court to

allow the accused to choose his own counsel; the selection is within the

discretion of the court. * * *

{¶ 11} The first assignment of error is overruled.

{¶ 12} Second Assignment of Error:

{¶ 13} “THE TRIAL COURT FINDING APPELLANT GUILTY WAS CONTRARY

TO THE MANIFEST WEIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE.”

{¶ 14} When reviewing a judgment under a manifest weight standard of review:

[t]he court, reviewing the entire record, weighs the evidence and all

reasonable inferences, considers the credibility of witnesses and determines

whether in resolving conflicts in the evidence, the [factfinder] clearly lost its

way and created such a manifest miscarriage of justice that the conviction must

be reversed and a new trial ordered. The discretionary power to grant a new

trial should be exercised only in the exceptional case in which evidence weighs

heavily against the conviction.

State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380, 387, 678 N.E.2d 541, quoting State v. Martin, 20 Ohio

App.3d 172, 175, 485 N.E.2d 717 (1st Dist.1983).

{¶ 15} Defendant was convicted of assault in violation of R.C. 2903.13(A), which

provides: “No person shall knowingly cause or attempt to cause physical harm to another or to

another’s unborn.” R.C. 2901.22(B) defines “knowingly” and provides: 5

A person acts knowingly, regardless of his purpose, when he is aware

that this conduct will probably cause a certain result or will probably be of a

certain nature. A person has knowledge of circumstances when he is aware

that such circumstances probably exist.

{¶ 16} At trial, Nelson testified that Defendant twice hit him on the head while Nelson

was fighting with Defendant’s father, and that he was “certain” that it was Defendant who

delivered the two blows. (Tr. 11). Nelson was injured as a result of Defendant’s blows to

Nelson’s head. This testimony, if credited, establishes that Defendant committed assault in

violation of R.C. 2903.13(A).

{¶ 17} Defendant argues that Nelson’s testimony should not be credited because

Nelson was not wearing his glasses at the time of the fight with Defendant’s father, and only

saw Defendant out of the corner of his eye. Further, Defendant’s father testified that he did

not see Defendant hit Nelson.

{¶ 18} The credibility of the witnesses and the weight to be given to their testimony

are matters for the trier of facts to resolve. State v. DeHass, 10 Ohio St.2d 230, 227 N.E.2d

212 (1967). In State v. Lawson, 2d Dist. Montgomery No. 16288, 1997 WL 476684, *4

(Aug. 22, 1997), we observed:

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Strickland v. Washington
466 U.S. 668 (Supreme Court, 1984)
State v. Martin
485 N.E.2d 717 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1983)
Thurston v. Maxwell
209 N.E.2d 204 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1965)
State v. Dehass
227 N.E.2d 212 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1967)
State v. Bradley
538 N.E.2d 373 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1989)
State v. Thompkins
678 N.E.2d 541 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1997)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2012 Ohio 3292, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-wintermute-ohioctapp-2012.