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. Figueroa

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eleventh District, Trumbull

August 5, 2019

STATE OF OHIO, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
JOHN LOUIS FIGUEROA, II Defendant-Appellant.

          Criminal Appeal from the Trumbull County Court of Common Pleas, Case No. 2017 CR 00600.

         Judgment: Affirmed.

          Dennis Watkins, Trumbull County Prosecutor, and Ashleigh Musick, Assistant Prosecutor, For Plaintiff-Appellee.

          Sean C. Buchanan, Slater & Zurz, For Defendant-Appellant.

          OPINION

          THOMAS R. WRIGHT, P.J.

         {¶1} Appellant, John Louis Figueroa, II, appeals his trafficking in cocaine convictions. We affirm.

         {¶2} Figueroa raises three assigned errors:

         {¶3} "[1.] The court erred by allowing the confidential informant, David Leach, to testify without the state providing his previous record, any plea agreements he received in exchange for his testimony, or a continuance to allow the defendant's trial attorney to investigate these issues.

         {¶4} "[2.] The court erred by not dismissing the indictment due to delay.

         {¶5} "[3.] The court abused its discretion by sentencing Mr. Figueroa to a maximum sentence."

         {¶6} A confidential informant made four, controlled purchases of crack cocaine from appellant in August and October 2016. Appellant was convicted by a jury of two counts of trafficking in cocaine, fifth-degree felonies, and two counts were dismissed.

         {¶7} Appellant's first assignment contends the trial court erred by allowing the confidential informant to testify because the state violated Crim.R. 16(B)(2) and did not disclose the identity of the informant until the first day of trial. Appellant claims the court should have granted him a continuance to investigate the informant's record and plea agreement in exchange for his testimony. Alternatively, appellant argues the court should have dismissed the charges against him based on the state's discovery violation. Because appellant fails to establish the premise of his argument, his first assigned error lacks merit.

         {¶8} Crim.R. 16 generally provides for a defendant's discovery and inspection of evidence, and Crim.R. 16(B)(2) states that upon receiving a defendant's demand for discovery, {¶9} "the prosecuting attorney shall provide copies [of] the following items related to the particular case indictment, * * * which are material to the preparation of a defense, or are intended for use by the prosecuting attorney as evidence at the trial * * * within the possession of, or reasonably available to the state, subject to the provisions of this rule:

         {¶10} ...


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.