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. Feagin

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Fifth District, Richland

June 4, 2019

STATE OF OHIO Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
MARCO A. FEAGIN Defendant-Appellant

          Criminal Appeal from the Court of Common Pleas, Case No. 03 CR 86H

          FOR PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE JOSEPH C. SNYDER PROSECUTING ATTORNEY

          FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT MARCO A. FEAGIN ALLEN/OAKWOOD CORR. INSTITUTION

          Hon. John W. Wise, P. J. Hon. Patricia A. Delaney, J. Hon. Earle E. Wise, Jr., J.

          OPINION

          WISE, JOHN, P. J.

         {¶1} Appellant Marco A. Feagin appeals the November 5, 2018, decision of the Richland County Court of Common Pleas denying his motion for leave to file a motion for a new trial.

         {¶2} Appellee is State of Ohio.

         STATEMENT OF THE FACTS AND CASE

         {¶3} The relevant facts and procedural history are as follows:

         {¶4} In 2004, Appellant Marco Feagin shot and killed James Williams at the American Legion in Mansfield, Ohio. Following a jury trial, Appellant was convicted of one count of murder, with a firearm specification; one count of possession of a firearm in a liquor permit premises; and one count of possession of a weapon under disability.

         {¶5} The trial court sentenced Appellant to fifteen years to life on the murder count, to be served consecutive to the three year sentence on the firearm specification. The trial court sentenced Appellant to one year in prison on the charge of possession of a weapon in a liquor permit premises, and one year in prison for the charge of possession of a weapon under disability. Appellant filed a direct appeal in State v. Feagin, 5th Dist. Richland No. 05CA1, 2006-Ohio-676, arguing the comment of a juror during voir dire tainted the jury pool, and the verdict was contrary to law and against the manifest weight of the evidence. We overruled Appellant's assignments of error and affirmed his convictions.

         {¶6} On December 22, 2004, Appellant was sentenced to an aggregate term of eighteen (18) years to life involving several counts including murder with a firearm specification.

         {¶7} Appellant filed a direct appeal and this Court affirmed his convictions and sentence. State v. Feagin, 5th Dist. Richland No. 05CA1, 2006-Ohio-676. Appellant did not raise any claims of prosecutorial misconduct or ineffective assistance of counsel.

         {¶8} On March 25, 2010, a new sentencing entry was entered in order to impose a mandatory term of post-release control. The trial court sentenced Appellant to the original sentence and added a five year term of mandatory post-release control.

         {¶9} Appellant filed an appeal, raising in part prosecutorial misconduct. This court affirmed the resentencing, and noted the arguments relative to prosecutorial misconduct were res judicata as they could have been raised in the direct appeal. State v. Feagin, 5th Dist. Richland No. 10CA46, 2011-Ohio-2025.

         {¶10} On April 25, 2011, the trial court denied Appellant's motion for leave to file a delayed motion for new trial.

         {¶11} Appellant filed an appeal, raising in part prosecutorial misconduct. This court affirmed the trial court's decision and again found the arguments relative to prosecutorial misconduct to be res judicata. State v. Feagin, 5th Dist. Richland No. 15CA41, 2015-Ohio-5107.

         {¶12} Appellant filed a motion for reconsideration. By judgment entry filed March 7, 2016, this Court granted the motion, finding the trial court erred in resentencing Appellant in its March 25, 2010 entry relative to post-release control. The portion of the entry on post-release control was vacated, but the remainder of Appellant's sentence was left intact. By judgment entry filed March 9, 2016, the trial court vacated the order of postrelease control.

         {¶13} On April 5, 2016, the trial court denied Appellant's motion to convey him for hearing after vacation of sentence. Appellant filed an appeal, raising in part prosecutorial misconduct. This Court affirmed the trial court's decision, and again found the arguments relative to prosecutorial ...


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.