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. Bitting

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Ninth District, Summit

May 24, 2017

STATE OF OHIO Appellee
v.
DANIEL L. BITTING Appellant

         APPEAL FROM JUDGMENT ENTERED IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS COUNTY OF SUMMIT, OHIO CASE No. CR 2016 04 1206

          ALAN M. MEDVICK, Attorney at Law, for Appellant.

          SHERRI BEVAN WALSH, Prosecuting Attorney, and RICHARD S. KASAY, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for Appellee.

          DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY

          THOMAS A. TEODOSIO, Judge.

         {¶1} Appellant, Daniel L. Bitting, appeals from his convictions in the Summit County Court of Common Pleas. This Court affirms.

         I.

         {¶2} Mr. Bitting entered the Barberton Mini Mart and purchased a Black & Mild cigar. Seconds later, Mr. Bitting's juvenile cousin, T.J., entered the store, pointed a gun at the clerk, demanded all of the money, and threatened to shoot her. Mr. Bitting did not leave the store during the robbery, but stood near T.J. and paced back and forth with his hands up. Mr. Bitting went to the front door at one point and looked outside, but he did not leave. After the robbery, Mr. Bitting and T.J. left the store within seconds of one another and ran off in the same direction.

         {¶3} Mr. Bitting was arrested and charged with complicity to commit aggravated robbery. The indictment was later supplemented with a complicity to commit robbery charge and two repeat violent offender specifications. The repeat violent offender specifications were bifurcated and the case proceeded to trial on the two complicity charges. After a jury trial, Mr. Bitting was convicted of both complicity to commit aggravated robbery and complicity to commit robbery. The trial judge then found Mr. Bitting to be a repeat violent offender. The two complicity counts were found to be allied offenses of similar import and were merged for sentencing. Mr. Bitting was sentenced to a mandatory term of six years in prison. No sentence was imposed for the repeat violent offender specification.

         {¶4} Mr. Bitting now appeals from his convictions and raises three assignments of error for this Court's review.

         II.

         ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR ONE

         APPELLANT'S CONVICTION WAS BASED UPON INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO SUSTAIN CONVICTION. THE TRIAL COURT ERRED BY DENYING APPELLANT'S CRIM.R. 29 MOTION.

         {¶5} In his first assignment of error, Mr. Bitting argues that there was insufficient evidence to show that (1) he assisted in the robbery in any way, and (2) the BB gun was a deadly weapon capable of inflicting death. We disagree with both propositions.

         {¶6} "We review a denial of a defendant's Crim.R. 29 motion for acquittal by assessing the sufficiency of the State's evidence." State v. Frashuer, 9th Dist. Summit No. 24769, 2010-Ohio-634, ¶ 33. "A sufficiency challenge of a criminal conviction presents a question of law, which we review de novo." State v. Spear, 9th Dist. Summit No. 28181, 2017-Ohio-169, ¶ 6, citing State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380, 386 (1997). "Sufficiency concerns the burden of production and tests whether the prosecution presented adequate evidence for the case to go to the jury." State v. Bressi, 9th Dist. Summit No. 27575, 2016-Ohio-5211, ¶ 25, citing Thompkins at 386. "The relevant inquiry is whether, after viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime proven beyond a reasonable doubt." Id., quoting State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (1991), paragraph two of the syllabus. But, "we do not resolve evidentiary conflicts or assess the credibility of witnesses, because these functions belong to the trier of fact." State v. Hall, 9th Dist. Summit No. 27827, 2017-Ohio-73, ¶ 10.

         {¶7} Mr. Bitting was convicted of complicity to commit aggravated robbery and complicity to commit robbery. The ...


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.