Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

State v. Hendricks

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Second District

October 10, 2008

STATE OF OHIO Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
JUAN R. HENDRICKS Defendant-Appellant

(Criminal Appeal from Common Pleas Court) T.C. CASE NO. 07CR0279

Stephen Schumaker, Pros. Attorney; Amy M. Smith, Asst. Pros. Attorney, Atty. Reg. No.0081712, Attorney for Plaintiff-Appellee

Brett A. Rinehart, Atty. Reg. No.0081226, Attorney for Defendant-Appellant

Juan R. Hendricks, #A549-003, Defendant-Appellant, pro se

OPINION

GRADY, J.

{¶ 1} Defendant, Juan Hendricks, appeals from his conviction and sentence for aggravated burglary.

{¶ 2} On March 8, 2007, around 3:00 a.m., ninety-year-old Sam Staten awoke to the sound of pounding on the front door of his home at 135 Fremont Avenue in Springfield. The man pounding on the door was yelling that Justin, a young man who lived with Staten and whom Staten had helped to raise, was in the hospital. Mr. Staten opened the door, and he was immediately tackled by Defendant. Each time Mr. Staten attempted to get up, Defendant would tackle him again. Defendant demanded money or an ATM card he could use to withdraw money. Mr. Staten told Defendant he did not have either one.

{¶ 3} Defendant took Mr. Staten upstairs to look for money and any other people who might be in the house. While upstairs, Defendant saw Mr. Staten's wallet and removed money from it. Defendant then tackled Mr. Staten one final time, disassembled the phone so Mr. Staten could not call the police, took Mr. Staten's car keys and drove off in his vehicle. Mr. Staten found another phone and called 911. As a result of Defendant's conduct Mr. Staten suffered broken ribs and a broken vertebrae in his back.

{¶ 4} Springfield Police Sergeant Robert Tate quickly arrived on the scene and observed that Mr. Staten was in a great deal of pain and that his breathing was labored. After obtaining a description of the suspect, Sergeant Tate left to search for Mr. Staten's stolen vehicle. Sergeant Tate located and stopped Mr. Staten's stolen vehicle on Catherine Street, one block from Staten's residence. A passenger in the stolen vehicle fled on foot, but Sergeant Tate apprehended him after a brief foot chase. Defendant, the driver of Mr. Staten's stolen vehicle, was arrested.

{¶ 5} Officers brought Mr. Staten to the scene of the stop on Catherine Street. Mr. Staten positively identified Defendant as the man who entered his home and assaulted and robbed him. Mr. Staten recognized Defendant as a friend of Justin's, who had been to Mr. Staten's home on several prior occasions.

{¶ 6} Defendant was indicted on two counts of aggravated burglary in violation of R.C. 2911.11(A)(1). Following a jury trial, count one of the indictment was dismissed. The jury found Defendant guilty of count two. The trial court sentenced Defendant to the maximum allowable ten year prison term.

{¶ 7} Defendant timely appealed to this court from his conviction and sentence. Defendant's appellate counsel filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California (1967), 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 19 L.Ed.2d 493, stating that he could find no meritorious issues for appellate review. We notified Defendant of his appellate counsel's representations and afforded him ample time to file a pro se brief. Defendant filed a pro se brief on March 11, 2008. The State filed its brief in response on July 22, 2008. This matter is now before us for a decision on the merits of Defendant's appeal.

{¶ 8} Defendant's appellate counsel raised one possible issue for appeal. Defendant raised the same issue in his pro se brief:

FIRST ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR

{¶ 9} "THE GUILTY VERDICT WAS AGAINST THE SUFFICIENCY/MANIFEST WEIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE."

{¶ 10} A sufficiency of the evidence argument disputes whether the State has presented adequate evidence on each element of the offense to allow the case to go to the jury or sustain the verdict as a matter of law. State v. Thompkins, (1997), 78 Ohio St.3d 380. The proper test to apply is the one set ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.