APPEAL FROM JUDGMENT ENTERED IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS COUNTY OF LORAIN, OHIO CASE No. 11CR083635.
ROBERT A. GAFFNEY, JR., Attorney at Law, for Appellant.
DENNIS P. WILL, Prosecuting Attorney, and NATASHA RUIZ GUERRIERI, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for Appellee.
DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY
(¶1} Defendant-Appellant, Rodney O. Treadwell, appeals from his conviction in the Lorain County Court of Common Pleas. For the following reasons, this Court affirms.
(¶2} In 1997, Treadwell pleaded guilty to one count of rape with a firearm and two counts of aggravated robbery with a firearm. All counts also included a notice of prior conviction specification. He was sentenced to nine years in prison. Under Ohio's then-existing sexual offender reporting requirements, he was classified as a sexually oriented offender and required to annually register his residence address with the county sheriff for ten years following his 2007 release from prison. In addition, he was required to report any change of his residence address to the county sheriff at least 20 days in advance.
(¶3} On September 12, 2011, a complaint was filed in the Elyria Municipal Court that charged Treadwell with failure to notify the sheriffs office of a change of address. Treadwell was bound over to the Grand Jury and indicted on one count of failure to register a change of address in violation of Revised Code Section 2950.05(F)(1). He pleaded not guilty and the case proceeded to a bench trial. The trial court found Treadwell guilty and sentenced him to three years in prison with five years of mandatory post-release control. Treadwell filed a timely appeal of his conviction and raises two assignment of error for this Court's review.
ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR I
THE STATE DID NOT PRESENT SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO SHOW THAT MR. TREADWELL COMMITTED THE CHARGED OFFENSE. ACCORDINGLY, HIS CONVICTION IS AGAINST THE SUFFICIENCY OF THE EVIDENCE AND SHOULD BE REVERSED BECAUSE IT VIOLATES THE FIFTH, SIXTH AND FOURTEENTH AMENDMENTS TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION, AND ARTICLE I, SECTION 10 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF OHIO.
(¶4} In his first assignment of error, Treadwell argues that his conviction was not supported by sufficient evidence. This Court disagrees.
(¶5} This Court reviews a question of whether there is sufficient evidence to support a conviction de novo. State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380, 386 (1997).
An appellate court's function when reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence to support a criminal conviction is to examine the evidence admitted at trial to determine whether such evidence, if believed, would convince the average mind of the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The relevant inquiry is whether, after viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution, any ...