FIRST DISTRICT

COURT OF APPEALS

        

THESE SUMMARIES ARE NEITHER APPROVED IN ADVANCE NOR ENDORSED BY THE COURT.  THEY ARE NOT HEADNOTES OR SYLLABI.  INTERESTED PARTIES SHOULD OBTAIN COPIES OF THE ACTUAL DECISIONS FROM THE CLERK OF THE COURT OF APPEALS.

 

DATE: Thursday, July 3, 2025

CAPTION: STATE V. BROWN

APPEAL NO.: C-240328 

TRIAL NO.: B-2205282

KEY WORDS: MANIFEST WEIGHT – MURDER – SELF-DEFENSE – SENTENCING – SPECIFICATIONS – R.C. 2929.14(B)(1)(g) 

SUMMARY: Defendant’s conviction for murder was not contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence because the State, in disproving defendant’s self-defense defense, demonstrated both that defendant was responsible for creating the conflict and that defendant lacked a bona fide belief that he faced imminent death or great bodily harm.

The trial court did not err in failing to merge the firearm specifications for purposes of sentencing and ordering them to be served consecutively because R.C. 2929.14(B)(1)(g) requires that certain offenders receive prison terms for multiple specifications, and imposing separate prison terms for multiple firearm specifications is required even when the criminal offenses to which those firearm specifications are attached have been merged as allied offenses. See State v. Bollar, 2022-Ohio-4370, ¶ 1. 

JUDGMENT: AFFIRMED 

JUDGES: OPINION by MOORE, J.; CROUSE, P.J., and BOCK, J., CONCUR.