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 of Ohio v. Keith Ramey

October 28, 2011

STATE OF OHIO APPELLATE PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE
v.
KEITH RAMEY DEFENDANT-APPELLANT



(Criminal Appeal from Common Pleas Court) Trial Court Case Nos. 09-CR-1051B Trial Court Case Nos. 09-CR-0869A

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Fain, J.

Cite as State v. Ramey,

OPINION

{¶1} Defendant-appellant Keith Ramey appeals from an order denying his petition for post-conviction relief, without a hearing. Ramey contends that the trial court erred in denying his petition without a hearing, because Ramey alleged conflicts of interest on the part of his trial attorney that disqualified his trial attorney from providing Ramey with effective representation.

{¶2} We conclude that the trial court correctly found that the facts alleged by Ramey in his petition, if true, did not establish conflicts of interest on the part of his trial attorney. Consequently, the order of the trial court denying his petition for post-conviction relief is Affirmed.

II

{¶3} " * * * Ramey was jointly indicted with co-defendant Jonathan Keeton in Case No. 09-CR-0869 for one count of aggravated robbery (deadly weapon), one count of aggravated robbery (serious physical harm), one count of felonious assault (deadly weapon), one count of felonious assault (serious physical harm), and one count of breaking and entering.

The aggravated robbery and felonious assault charges each contained a firearm specification. Subsequently, * * * Ramey and Keeton were indicted on an additional charge in Case No. 09-CR-1051 for having a weapon while under disability.

{¶4} "All of the charges against Ramey and Keeton stem from incidents * * * wherein the defendants were accused of breaking and entering into and stealing from 'Nasty N8's' tattoo parlor located at 805 East Main Street in Springfield, Ohio. The owner of the tattoo parlor reported that tattoo equipment, ink, a laptop computer, a printer, and cell phones were missing after the break-in.

{¶5} "Ramey and Keeton were also accused of beating and robbing an individual named Howard Fannon. The robbery and assault of Fannon also occurred on [the same day], shortly after Ramey and Keeton were alleged to have broken into the tattoo parlor. During the assault, Ramey allegedly shocked Fannon multiple times with a taser while Keeton hit him over the head with the butt of a handgun before they stole his watch and two gold necklaces. Fannon immediately called 911 to report the robbery, and Ramey was arrested a short time later at his home located at 106 N. Greenmount Avenue in Springfield, Ohio. Keeton was arrested the next day * * * at his father's house[,] also located in Springfield. During the course of their investigations, Springfield police were able to recover almost all of the items alleged to have been stolen by Ramey and Keeton." State v. Ramey, Clark App. No. 2010-CA-19, 2011-Ohio-1288, ¶ 2-4.

{¶6} Ramey was convicted of two counts of Aggravated Robbery, with firearm specifications, one count of Felonious Assault (deadly weapon), and one count of Having a Weapon while under a Disability. He was acquitted of Felonious Assault (serious physical harm) and of Breaking and Entering. The trial court merged the two counts of Aggravated Robbery. Ramey was sentenced to three years on the firearm specification, eight years for the Aggravated Robbery, five years for Felonious Assault, and one year for Having a Weapon while under a Disability. The court ordered the three-year term for the firearm specification to be served consecutively and prior to the other sentences, which were to be served concurrently with one another, for an aggregate prison sentence of eleven years.

{¶7} Ramey's conviction for Having a Weapon while under a Disability was reversed and vacated on appeal on speedy trial grounds; his other convictions, and the sentences therefor, were affirmed. State v. Ramey, supra.

{¶8} Ramey filed a petition for post-conviction review, the denial of which is the subject of this appeal. In his petition, Ramey asserted the following "Ground for Relief":

{ΒΆ9} "The defendant Keith Ramey was appointed counsel by the Common Pleas Court of Clark ...


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.