[Cite as State v. Harris, 2024-Ohio-2709.]

COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO

EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA

STATE OF OHIO, :

Plaintiff-Appellee, :

No. 113364

v. :

ASHLEY DAVIS HARRIS, :

Defendant-Appellant. :

JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION

JUDGMENT: AFFIRMED

RELEASED AND JOURNALIZED: July 18, 2024

Criminal Appeal from the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas

Case No. CR-22-675513-A

Appearances:

Michael C. O’Malley, Cuyahoga County Prosecuting 

Attorney, and Anna Faraglia, Assistant Prosecuting 

Attorney, for appellee.

The Law Office of Schlachet & Levy and Eric M. Levy, for 

appellant.

MARY EILEEN KILBANE, J.:

Defendant-appellant Ashley Harris (“Harris”) appeals her 

convictions in this case. For the following reasons, we affirm.
Factual and Procedural History

This matter stems from the fatal shooting of Shaterrica Davis 

(“Davis”) on September 27, 2022, at the North Randall Apartments (“North Randall 

Apartments” or “the apartment complex”) in North Randall, Ohio.

On September 27, 2022, Davis and Darnesha Embry (“Embry”), who 

were in a relationship, spent several hours at a local lounge where Embry became 

very intoxicated and the women argued. As the women drove to Davis’s apartment 

complex, where Embry had moved into Davis’s apartment about one month prior,

Embry called numerous friends, including Harris — Embry’s former girlfriend —

and asked them to come and pick Embry up. Davis called Embry’s best friend, 

Shyonna Williams (“Williams”) and asked her to help with Embry.

At the apartment complex, Embry’s vehicle was backed into a parking 

space, with the rear of the car facing a wall. Davis parked her car perpendicular to 

the front of Embry’s vehicle, which was already parked in the lot, so that Embry 

could not leave the apartment complex in her vehicle. The women moved from 

Davis’s car to Embry’s vehicle and argued loudly, resulting in the police being called 

to the apartment complex. The police arrived around 10:00 p.m., spoke briefly with 

Embry and Davis, and left the apartment complex.

Shortly after the police departed, Williams drove into the parking lot 

in her gray SUV, and Harris entered the parking lot driving her dark blue Kia 

Sorrento. Khamante Turpin-Marshall (“Khamante”), Harris’s 19-year-old godson, 
was a passenger in Harris’s vehicle. Williams parked in front of Davis’s vehicle, and 

Harris parked behind Davis’s vehicle.

The North Randall Police Department received phone calls at 

approximately 10:20 p.m. stating gunshots were fired at the North Randall 

Apartments. Upon arrival at the apartment complex’s parking lot, the police found 

Davis slumped on the ground next to the driver’s side of her vehicle with a fatal 

gunshot wound to the right side of her head. Embry, Williams, Harris, and 

Khamante were not present when the police arrived and discovered Davis’s body, 

but the North Randall police determined through their investigation that these 

individuals were present at the time of Davis’s shooting.

On November 14, 2022, in Cuyahoga C.P. No. CR-22-675513, a 

Cuyahoga County Grand Jury indicted Harris on five counts: Count 1, aggravated 

murder, in violation of R.C. 2903.01(A), Count 2, murder, in violation of R.C. 

2903.02(A), Count 3, murder, in violation of R.C. 2903.02(B), Count 4, felonious 

assault, in violation of R.C. 2903.11(A)(1), and Count 5, felonious assault, in 

violation of R.C. 2903.11(A)(2). All counts carried one- and three-year firearm 

specifications. On November 17, 2022, Harris pleaded not guilty to the indictment.

The State also charged Embry, Khamante, and Williams as 

codefendants in Davis’s murder, and they all initially pleaded not guilty to the 

charges. On October 2, 2023, the three codefendants individually withdrew their 

prior pleas, pleaded guilty to amended charges, and agreed to testify truthfully at 

Harris’s trial. Embry pleaded guilty to involuntary manslaughter and was sentenced 
to 30 months in prison; Khamante pleaded guilty to tampering with evidence and 

was sentenced to five years of community-control sanctions; and Williams pleaded 

guilty to obstructing justice and was sentenced to one and one-half years of 

community-control sanctions.

On the same date the codefendants accepted plea agreements, the

jury trial against Harris commenced. Generally, the trial testimony showed that on

September 27, 2022, Davis, Embry, Williams, Harris, and Khamante all met at the 

apartment complex. While Williams, Harris, and Khamante attempted to help 

Embry leave the apartment complex — in either Williams’s or Harris’s vehicle — a 

disagreement ensued over obtaining Embry’s car keys from Davis. Two guns shots 

were fired, one in the air and one that caused the death of Davis. The four surviving 

individuals all provided different statements at trial — Harris claimed Khamante 

fired the gunshots; Williams and Khamante stated Harris fired a gunshot into the 

air and they assumed she also fired the fatal shot; and Embry testified that she heard 

the gunshots but did not see who fired them. Residents at the apartment complex 

also provided statements as to what they observed from their balcony windows. 

Below is a summary of the pertinent trial testimony. 

Harris

At trial, the State played the videotape of the North Randall Police 

Department’s October 19, 2022 interrogation of Harris. Harris offered a number of 

stories as to what occurred on the date of Davis’s death — September 27, 2022. 

Initially, Harris stated she had not had contact with Embry since April 2022. Harris 
then stated that she and Khamante drove around on September 27, 2022, looking 

for Embry. Harris stated they drove through the parking lot at North Randall 

Apartments but did not see Embry and drove home. Harris next stated that when 

she and Khamante arrived at the apartment complex, there were three girls, 

including Embry, arguing in the parking lot. Harris stated that she and Khamante 

exited her vehicle but no one spoke with them so she and Khamante left the area.

After almost an hour of questioning, Harris provided another version 

of what occurred. Harris stated that she and Khamante exited her car in the 

apartment complex parking lot where Embry, Williams, and Davis were present. 

Harris said she stayed near her car, Embry walked towards Harris, and Khamante 

approached Williams and Davis. Harris stated that Khamante attempted to obtain 

Embry’s car keys from Davis. Harris said she overheard Davis tell Khamante to “go 

get your momma” to which Khamante responded “my momma dead.” Harris stated 

that on a prior occasion Khamante had “flipped out” when someone asked how his 

mother died. Harris further stated that Khamante fired a warning gunshot in the 

air at which point Harris suggested to Embry that they leave. Harris stated that she 

retrieved her husband’s firearm that she kept in her vehicle and then heard a second 

gunshot and saw Davis fall to the ground. Harris left the parking lot alone in her 

vehicle.

Harris informed the police that she did not shoot anyone and 

Khamante was the shooter. Harris also stated she tried to protect Khamante and 

Khamante told her not to say anything about the shooting.
Embry

Embry testified that she was in a relationship with Harris from May 

2021 through August 2022; she subsequently began dating Davis and moved into 

Davis’s apartment in September 2022. According to Embry, Harris did not know 

Embry was involved with Davis prior to September 27, 2022, the day of the shooting.

Embry testified that around 4:00 p.m. on September 27, 2022, she 

and Davis went to the Victory Lounge where Embry became very intoxicated. Embry 

stated that while at the bar, she argued with Harris via text, and Embry and Davis

announced, via a live broadcast on Instagram, they were dating. Embry also stated 

that she and Davis argued at the Victory Lounge and while driving to the North 

Randall Apartments, Embry called several people, including Williams and Harris,

asking them to pick her up from the apartment building.

Embry testified that upon arrival at the apartment building, she and 

Davis moved to Embry’s vehicle. While seated in Embry’s vehicle, the police arrived 

due to the women’s verbal argument, and after a short exchange the police departed 

without incident. Embry stated that Davis secured Embry’s car keys, purse, and 

telephone to prevent Embry from driving in an intoxicated state.

Embry also stated she fell asleep in the driver’s seat of her vehicle 

while waiting for Williams to come to the apartment building to pick her up. Embry 

stated that she awoke to Williams pulling on her arm with Khamante also present. 

Embry testified that she exited her vehicle and as she walked towards Williams’s

gray car — parked to the side of Davis’s vehicle — Embry saw Harris shouting at 
Davis in an attempt to gain possession of Embry’s car keys. Embry testified that she 

walked towards Harris’s blue car — parked behind Davis’s vehicle — and asked 

Harris why she was at the apartments, but Harris ignored Embry and spoke directly 

with Davis.

According to Embry, she then followed Williams’s instructions and 

walked towards Williams’s car; Embry heard a gunshot but did not see who fired the 

gun. Embry stated that she entered Williams’s vehicle and heard a second gunshot 

although she did not see who held the firearm. Embry testified that Williams and 

Khamante joined her in Williams’s car and informed her that Davis was shot. Embry 

testified that she began to scream and tried to return to see Davis, but Williams 

refused to allow her to do so. Embry stated that for reasons unknown to her, 

Williams drove Khamante to Harris’s home and dropped Embry at the home of 

Nicole Yarber (“Yarber”), Harris’s mother. Embry testified that no one called the 

police that evening.

Embry also testified that she did not see Harris, Williams, or 

Khamante in possession of a firearm on the night of the shooting. Embry further 

stated that Harris carried a firearm and had a concealed carry weapon permit.

Embry testified that she stayed with Yarber for several days and 

during that time, Embry did not contact Harris but she spoke twice with Williams. 

Embry stated that Davis’s family, via social media, threatened to harm her and, 

therefore, Embry had her brother drive her home to Georgia. Embry stated Harris 

paid her brother $300 to drive her.
Embry testified that she first spoke with the North Randall Police 

Department while she was in Georgia, and she provided her first written statement 

to the Georgia police on October 3, 2022. Embry’s written statement indicated she 

was so intoxicated on September 27, 2022, that she could not remember the details 

of the evening. Embry testified that as the trial date approached, she remembered 

the incident in greater detail and was offered a plea agreement.

Khamante

In June 2022, upon the death of his mother, Khamante moved in with 

Harris whom he referred to as his “auntie.” Khamante admitted he was arrested in 

August 2022 for possession of guns; the guns were confiscated, and he was placed 

on probation. Khamante denied possessing another gun following the August 2022 

incident.

On September 27, 2022, Khamante helped Harris track Embry’s 

location on his telephone because Embry was intoxicated and needed a ride. 

Khamante testified that he and Harris drove to Williams’s home where they learned 

that Embry was out drinking. According to Khamante, he and Harris drove around 

the local bars looking for Embry, and eventually ended up at the North Randall 

Apartments.

Khamante testified that at the apartment complex they found Embry 

and Davis loudly fighting in Embry’s vehicle. According to Khamante, Harris 

remained in her vehicle, and Khamante approached Embry’s car at the same time 

as Williams. Khamante stated that Williams unsuccessfully attempted to remove 
Embry from her vehicle. Khamante further stated that Harris then approached 

Embry’s vehicle and she, along with Williams, removed Embry from the vehicle, and 

the women all walked towards Harris’s vehicle.

Khamante testified that as he stood near the driver’s side of Davis’s 

vehicle he asked Davis for Embry’s car keys. He stated that Davis refused to provide 

the car keys before Embry returned Davis’s telephone; Khamante went to Harris and 

Embry and relayed this information. Khamante stated that he turned and saw Davis 

opening the driver’s side door of her vehicle, and Khamante approached Davis and 

ultimately stood inside the open driver’s side door of Davis’s car. Khamante testified 

that Davis pushed the car door into him, preventing Khamante from walking away. 

According to Khamante, Davis stated she needed to talk with Khamante’s mom; 

Khamante assumed Davis was referring to Harris.1

Khamante stated that Harris — who was near the passenger headlight 

of Embry’s car — then fired a warning gunshot into the air and walked back towards

her vehicle. Khamante testified that Harris stored the gun in her vehicle, and he saw 

her fire the warning shot. Khamante testified that he was “chill” during his 

encounter with Davis, and he denied shouting while at the apartment complex.

According to Khamante, Davis responded to the warning shot by 

stating, “They didn’t stop making guns after they made yours.” Tr. 777. Khamante 

1 Harris stated during her interview that on a prior occasion, Khamante “flipped 

out” after being asked about his mother who had died in the prior year, suggesting 

Khamante may have also “flipped out” when Davis asked about his mother and this 

caused him to fire a warning gunshot. Khamante testified he did not have any reaction to 

Davis’s request to speak with his mother.
testified that Harris then began walking towards her car — parked behind Davis’s 

vehicle — and Khamante asked Davis again for Embry’s keys when a second gunshot 

was fired; Khamante observed Davis’s body spin and land in a sitting position on the 

ground. Khamante stated he did not initially realize Davis had been shot, and he 

told Davis to stand up. Khamante testified he knew Davis had been shot when he

noticed blood on her head. Khamante further testified that he did not see Harris 

shoot Davis, but he assumed she was the shooter because she was the only person 

possessing a firearm.

Khamante stated that after the second gunshot he tried to retrieve his 

telephone from Harris’s vehicle, but Harris would not unlock the car doors for him. 

Khamante testified that Embry ran over to him and directed him to Williams’s car. 

Khamante stated he then walked to Williams’s car and sat in the front seat, but he 

did not know how to drive her foreign car and, therefore, he moved to the back seat. 

Khamante testified that Williams drove from the crime scene and dropped him off

at Harris’s home where he turned his clothes over to Harris who was concerned 

there might be blood on them. Khamante stated that at the time of the shooting he 

wore an orange and white Comma Club hoodie, purple jeans, and Air Force One 

shoes. 

Khamante denied he had a firearm while he was at the apartment 

complex and denied that he yelled at Williams, “Bi*!h, you be next.” Tr. 772.

Khamante testified that Harris wrote him two letters while he was in 

jail that were dated November 19, 2022, and December 21, 2022. Khamante stated 
that he did not know Harris informed the North Randall Police Department that he 

was the shooter until he received Harris’s December 2022 letter.

Williams

Williams testified that she did not carry firearms nor did she know 

Embry, her childhood friend, to carry firearms. Williams further testified that she 

had not met Harris or Khamante prior to the night of the shooting.

Williams stated she drove her gray SUV to the Randall Park 

Apartments on September 27, 2022, to pick up Embry. Williams stated that upon 

arrival she found Embry and Davis seated in Embry’s vehicle and observed Davis’s 

vehicle parked in front of Embry’s car with the front driver’s side door open. 

Williams stated she was wearing green pants and a black hoodie with her hair in a 

scarf. Williams further stated that she parked her SUV to the right of Davis’s vehicle.

Williams testified that she pulled Embry out of her car and they stood 

there until Harris and Khamante arrived a few minutes later. Williams stated she 

remained at Embry’s vehicle and Embry walked towards Harris’s vehicle where 

Harris and Khamante attempted to put her in the back seat of Harris’s vehicle. 

Williams testified that she and Davis initially sat inside Embry’s car and could not 

hear any conversation between Embry, Harris, and Khamante, although she heard 

them yelling at each other. Per Williams, Davis and Williams decided to let Harris 

and Khamante leave the apartment complex with Embry. Williams stated that as 

she and Davis walked from Embry’s vehicle towards their respective vehicles, Harris 

approached them slapping a gun against the side of her leg and asking Davis for 
Embry’s car keys; Embry and Khamante began to walk from Harris’s vehicle towards 

Williams and Davis. Williams stated that when Davis refused to provide the keys 

before obtaining her telephone from Embry, Harris fired a warning shot in the air 

and said, “[S]ay that one more time.” Tr. 808. Upon hearing the warning shot, 

Williams ran to her car and crouched down on the passenger side of her vehicle, 

leaving Harris, Davis, Embry, and Khamante all standing at the driver’s side of 

Davis’s vehicle.

Williams testified that approximately five seconds later a second 

gunshot was fired. Williams stated that Embry then ran towards her and said 

“Ashley, what did you just do” or “Ashley, please stop for me.” Tr. 811, 819. Williams 

further stated that Khamante jumped in the driver’s seat of her car; Harris stated,

“just take that bi*!h”; and Williams walked to the driver’s side of her vehicle where 

Khamante said to her, “Get in the car before you next.” Tr. 811. Williams stated she 

was frightened by Khamante’s aggressive yelling that suggested he carried a firearm. 

Williams stated she did not call 911 following the shooting but at Khamante’s and 

Embry’s direction she drove Khamante to a gas station and Embry to Yarber’s home. 

Williams testified that she saw only Harris in possession of a firearm.

Khristopher Wilson (“Wilson”)

On the day of the shooting, Wilson resided with his friend, Andrew 

McGrew (“McGrew”), in a second-floor apartment at the Randall Park Apartments. 

Wilson testified that both men heard a gunshot outside, they turned out the lights, 

and looked outside. Wilson stated he “peeked out” the window and observed (1) two 
cars in the parking lot running with their lights on — a red car and a gray or darkercolored sedan, (2) a male wearing a navy and orange hoodie, (3) a long-haired 

female dressed in green and wearing black leggings, (4) a stronger, more masculine 

individual whom he thought was a female, and (5) another female.

Wilson testified that the male circled Davis’s vehicle and the more 

“masculine female” dressed in a black hoodie entered the gray vehicle. Wilson 

testified that he then heard shouting and yelling by the male with a deep voice, 

followed by a second gunshot and a “faint scream.” Wilson further stated:

[W]hen the guy was shouting, when they were kind of shouting I 

thought I heard him saying, “Get in the car. I’m not about to drive. I 

just shot this b*!ch up,” or something. Excuse [my] language. But 

that’s what I believe that I heard.

Tr. 454.

Wilson further testified that the female dressed in green and the male 

entered the car where the “masculine female” was seated, and drove off. Wilson 

stated he proceeded to the parking lot and observed Davis, on the ground and 

bleeding; Wilson remained there until the police arrived. Wilson stated he was not 

able to identify the facial features of any of the individuals he observed that evening.

Andrew McGrew (“McGrew”)

McGrew testified that on the night of the shooting he heard arguing, 

for more than ten minutes, from outside his balcony window, but when he looked 

outside the window, he did not see anyone. McGrew testified that he then heard a 

gunshot and again looked out the balcony window and “saw what looked to be a 
male walking across, behind the parked cars, just approaching the vertical parked 

car. I saw what looked to be a female. I’m not sure.” Tr. 468-469. McGrew further 

testified that he “peeked out” the apartment window for about two seconds before 

a second gunshot was fired.

McGrew testified that following the second gunshot, Wilson 

approached the window where Wilson remained “for a long time.” Tr. 472. McGrew 

also said he pulled Wilson aside because he did not think it was safe for Wilson to 

stand in front of the window.

McGrew testified that he did not see anyone’s faces or defining 

features; he quickly stopped looking after the second shot was fired; and he did not 

know who fired the gunshots. McGrew called 911 to the crime scene.

Patrolman Freeman Mays (“Patrolman Mays”)

Patrolman Mays testified that on September 27, 2022, he and 

Patrolman Shamblin reported to the North Randall Apartments due to complaints 

about a disturbance in the parking lot. Patrolman Mays stated that the officers 

spoke with Davis and Embry, who were seated in Embry’s vehicle, and then left the 

parking lot. Patrolman Mays testified that he returned to the apartment complex 

about ten minutes later due to a reported shooting. Patrolman Mays stated that 

upon returning to the apartment complex, he discovered Davis’s and Embry’s 

vehicles in the same positions as before although Davis’s vehicle was now running 

and the front driver’s side door was wide open. Patrolman Mays also stated he 

observed Davis’s body slumped on the ground on the driver’s side of her vehicle.
On cross-examination, Patrolman Mays reviewed his report, which 

was prepared following his investigation, and testified that Wilson and McGrew 

heard Davis outside their balcony arguing with a black male and the witnesses 

described the male as approximately five feet eleven inches, slim build, darkerskinned with a short haircut, and wearing an orange and blue hoodie and blue jeans. 

Patrolman Mays stated that the men informed him they heard arguing from their 

apartment; exited on to their balcony; returned inside their apartment; and then 

heard a pop. Patrolman Mays further testified that the witnesses told him they 

observed from their apartment window an unknown male standing over Davis, with 

a firearm in his hand, and “as they was getting ready to walk off, they turned back 

around and fired a shot in the direction where Ms. Davis was sitting, slumped 

against the wheel.” Tr. 381. Patrolman Mays confirmed that his report indicated 

the black male then grabbed Embry and pulled her towards the gray SUV.

Patrolman Steve Shamblin (“Patrolman Shamblin”)

Patrolman Shamblin testified that he interviewed a female resident at 

the apartment complex who heard two gunshots and then looked out her secondfloor balcony window. Patrolman Shamblin testified that the female resident stated 

she saw Embry dragged towards and placed into the front seat of the gray SUV that 

was parked in front of Davis’s vehicle. Patrolman Shamblin further testified that the 

witness stated she observed a female pick up something from the ground; heard the 

woman state, “I got the casing. Let’s go.”; and saw that individual enter the gray 

SUV. Tr. 425. 
Patrolman Shamblin testified that while the female witness opined 

that the woman with the casing entered the gray SUV, he learned through further 

investigations that the woman who picked up the casing entered the black SUV. 

Patrolman Shamblin also stated one shell casing was recovered from the crime 

scene.

Detective-Sergeant Melvin Stitt (“Stitt”)

Stitt, with the North Randall Police Department, testified to the 

investigation into Davis’s death. Stitt testified that on the day after Davis’s fatal 

shooting, the police department received an anonymous tip that a dark-blue Kia 

Sorrento involved in the shooting was located at Harris’s home address in Garfield 

Heights, Ohio. Stitt further stated that Harris and Yarber were questioned on that 

day, and Harris denied seeing or speaking with Embry since April 2022, but 

provided contact information for Embry.

According to Stitt, on October 3, 2022, Embry informed the North 

Randall Police Department that she was in Georgia; Embry subsequently provided 

a written statement to the local Georgia police indicating Embry, Harris, and 

Williams were at the North Randall Apartments on the night of Davis’s shooting. 

Stitt testified that arrest warrants for Harris, Embry, and Williams were issued 

following Embry’s Georgia statement. Stitt stated that on October 19, 2022, Harris 

was questioned, and she identified Khamante as Davis’s shooter. Stitt testified that 

he did not fully accept Harris’s allegations but Khamante became a person of interest 

based upon her statements.
In November 2022, the police department recovered two firearms

potentially related to Davis’s shooting — a Smith & Wesson 9 mm that belonged to 

Harris and a Taurus 9 mm recovered from Harris’s ex-husband’s vehicle, the same 

vehicle Harris drove on September 27, 2022. The firearms were submitted for 

analysis that showed neither fired the fatal shot.

Stitt stated that Williams accepted a proffer from the prosecutor’s 

office and she provided an interview to his department in June 2023. Stitt further 

stated that Khamante and Embry also accepted proffers and submitted to police 

interviews. According to Stitt, none of the three witnesses identified Khamante as 

the shooter. Stitt testified that the various stories presented by Harris, Khamante, 

Embry, and Williams appeared to be filled with half-truths, and some of the facts 

correlated while others did not.

Michael Roberts (“Roberts”)

Roberts, a forensic scientist with the Ohio Bureau of Criminal 

Investigation, testified that two guns obtained from Harris and Yarrow were 

excluded as the source of the spent cartridge recovered at the crime scene.

Dr. David Dolinak (“Dr. Dolinak”)

Dr. Dolinak, with the Cuyahoga County Medical Examiner, testified 

that he conducted Davis’s autopsy. Dr. Dolinak observed a single fatal gunshot 

wound that entered the right side of Davis’s head, just above her eyebrow, and exited 

on the left side of her head. Based upon the lack of gun powder, stippling, or muzzle 
imprint, Dr. Dolinak testified that the gun was most likely fired at least two to three 

feet from Davis’s body.

Jailhouse Letters

Harris sent two letters — dated November 19, 2022, and December 

21, 2022 — to Khamante while they were both in jail, and those letters were 

introduced as exhibits at trial. The December 2022 letter included the following 

statements:

I’m gone [sic] get this off my chest and leave it alone after this. . . . I’m 

so sorry [Khamante], I’m just gone [sic] get it out. When they 

questioned me[,]I lied and said it was you that shot her because that[’]s 

what the det[ective] told me to say. At first[,] I told them you rode with 

me because it was night time [sic] and you always went places with me 

and they didn’t like that answer so I told them whatever I could to get 

away from them and I said what he told me to say . . . All is gone [sic]

be well don’t be scared or worried and if they question you again tell 

them the truth, that you rode with me to get Darnesha and then rode 

with them to get your b*!ch and come home. . . . I love you so much 

handsome this sh*t been eating me up not being able to tell you about 

my lie of a statement they got from me. . . .

At the close of the State’s case and upon the defense resting, Harris 

presented Crim.R. 29 motions that the trial court denied. Harris requested an 

inferior offense jury instruction on voluntary manslaughter that the trial court 

denied, and Harris objected to this on the record. The trial court instructed the jury 

to consider the codefendants’ testimony with grave suspicion.

The jury returned a verdict of not guilty on Count 1, aggravated 

murder and guilty verdicts on Count 2, murder in violation of R.C. 2903.02(A);

Count 3, murder, in violation of R.C. 2903.02(B); Count 4, felonious assault, in 
violation of R.C. 2903.11(A)(1); and Count 5, felonious assault, in violation of R.C. 

2903.11(A)(2), with Counts 2, 3, 4, and 5 each carrying one- and three-year firearms 

specifications.

For sentencing purposes, Counts 2, 3, 4, and 5 merged, and the State 

elected to proceed with sentencing on Count 2. The firearm specification on Counts 

3, 4, and 5 also merged. On October 16, 2023, the trial court sentenced Harris to a 

life sentence with eligibility for parole after 15 years. The court also ordered Harris 

to serve the three-year firearm specifications on Counts 2 and 3 prior to and 

consecutive to the life sentence and consecutive to each other, resulting in a life 

sentence without the possibility of parole until after 21 years.

On November 14, 2023, Harris filed a timely notice of appeal. She

raises three assignments of error for our review:

Assignment of Error I: Harris was convicted on all counts absent 

sufficient evidence.

Assignment of Error II: Harris’ convictions must be vacated where she 

was convicted against the manifest weight of the evidence.

Assignment of Error III: Harris’ convictions must be vacated where the 

trial court did not instruct on voluntary manslaughter.

Legal Analysis

Initially, we note that in her first two assignments of error, Harris 

challenges the sufficiency of the evidence and the weight of the evidence supporting 

her convictions in Counts 2 through 5. For sentencing purposes, Counts 2, 3, 4, and 

5 merged, and the State elected to proceed with sentencing on Count 2, murder, in 
violation of R.C. 2903.02(A). This court has previously found that with merged 

offenses, if there is sufficient evidence to support the offense on which the State 

elected to have the defendant sentenced, the reviewing court need not consider the 

sufficiency of the evidence or manifest weight of the evidence on the merged counts 

because any error would constitute harmless error. State v. Ramos, 2016-Ohio7685, ¶ 14 (8th Dist.), citing State v. Powell, 49 Ohio St.3d 255, 263 (1990), and 

Ramos at ¶ 15, citing State v. Worley, 2016-Ohio-2722, ¶ 23 (8th Dist.). Thus, 

pursuant to Ramos, we will only consider Count 2, murder, in our evaluation of the 

sufficiency of the evidence and the manifest weight of the evidence arguments.

Sufficiency of the Evidence

In her first assignment of error, Harris argues there was insufficient 

evidence to find her guilty of murder where independent witnesses stated the person 

in an orange hoodie — Khamante — fired the fatal shot and the witnesses heard the 

male state he had just shot the victim. Further, Harris argues the codefendants’ 

testimony was biased; no one testified that they saw Harris shoot Davis; and the 

jailhouse letters were “merely filler” that reflect Harris’s apology for identifying 

Khamante as the shooter but do not show Harris lied when she identified Khamante 

as the shooter.

Where a party challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting a 

conviction, a determination of whether the State has met its burden of production 

at trial is conducted. State v. Hunter, 2006-Ohio-20, ¶ 41 (8th Dist.), citing State v. 

Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380, 390 (1997). An appellate court reviewing sufficiency 
of the evidence must determine “‘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.’” State v. Leonard, 2004-

Ohio-6235, ¶ 77, quoting State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (1991), paragraph two of 

the syllabus. With a sufficiency inquiry, an appellate court does not review whether 

the State’s evidence is to be believed but whether, if believed, the evidence admitted 

at trial supported the conviction. State v. Starks, 2009-Ohio-3375, ¶ 25 (8th Dist.), 

citing Thompkins at 387. A sufficiency of the evidence argument is not a factual 

determination, but a question of law. Id.

To prove murder in violation of R.C. 2903.02(A), the State must 

prove beyond a reasonable doubt that

[n]o person shall purposely cause the death of another or the unlawful 

termination of another’s pregnancy.

The defense relies heavily on the testimony of independent witnesses.

Wilson and McGrew testified as to their observations from two floors above the 

parking lot through their balcony window. Tr. 443. Wilson stated he “peeked out”

the balcony window and observed two cars — a gray and a red vehicle — and four 

individuals. Upon refreshing his memory with his September 27, 2022 written 

statement, Wilson testified that after he heard the first gunshot, he observed the 

male in an orange and navy hoodie — presumably Khamante — who appeared 

excited or frustrated. Wilson stated that he saw the individual circling the red 

vehicle, and he then heard the male shouting. Wilson stated he thought he heard 
the male shout, “Get in the car. I’m not about to drive. I just shot this b*!ch up” or 

something similar to that, and he then heard a faint scream. Tr. 454. Wilson never 

testified that he saw the male, nor any of the four individuals, holding a firearm or 

shooting the victim.

McGrew testified that it was “pretty dark” outside when he heard 

yelling outside his apartment window. Tr. 466. McGrew stated that he could not 

decipher the comments below but heard yelling and cursing. After hearing a 

gunshot, McGrew peeked out the window and said he “thought [he] saw a male 

walking” and “what looked to be a female” walking towards the rear bumper of the 

red car. Tr. 469-470. McGrew admitted he feared being seen or being shot at while 

standing in the window. After two seconds, McGrew heard a second gunshot 

although he could not see who fired the gun. After a car drove off, McGrew saw a 

body on the ground and called 911. McGrew neither testified that he saw any 

firearms nor did he identify the shooter.

A female witness, who was not present at trial but whose statement 

was recited by Patrolman Shamblin, stated she saw Embry placed in the gray SUV 

and a female pick up something from the ground and declare, “I got the casing. Let’s 

go.” Tr. 425. 

In addition to the independent witness testimony, the jury heard from 

the three codefendants who agreed to testify against Harris as part of their respective 

plea agreements. Embry heard two gunshots but denied seeing the shooter. 

Williams testified that Harris had a firearm and fired a warning shot in the air. 
Williams did not see who fired the second gunshot but following the second gunshot,

Embry rushed towards Williams and said, “Ashley, what did you just do” or “Ashley, 

please stop for me.” Tr. 811, 819. Khamante testified that he saw Harris fire the 

warning gunshot, and he assumed Harris fired the fatal gunshot since no one else 

had a firearm. The version of events offered by Khamante and Williams also 

supports the conclusion that Harris stood in close proximity to Davis at the time of 

the fatal shot.

The trial court advised the jury that the codefendants’ testimony was 

not inadmissible due to self-interest, but such testimony should be subject to grave 

suspicion and weighed with great caution. The trial court also instructed the jury 

that they judge the credibility of the witnesses and they could believe some, all, or 

none of the testimony.

In Harris’s videotaped police interrogation, she offered four different

scenarios as to what transpired on the evening of September 27, 2022, but 

consistently denied she shot Davis. Yet, in Harris’s December 21, 2022 letter to 

Khamante, she admits she lied to the police when she identified Khamante as the 

shooter: “When they questioned me[,] I lied and said it was you that shot her 

because that[’]s what the det[ective] told me to say.” Harris’s argument that the 

letters represent an apology for telling the truth — that Khamante shot Davis — is 

not credible based upon the wording of the letter.
While the trial testimony was at times contradictory, the evidence was 

sufficient to establish that Harris purposefully shot Davis. Thus, Harris’s first 

assignment of error is overruled.

Manifest Weight of the Evidence

In her second assignment of error, Harris contends that the jury’s 

verdict was against the manifest weight of the evidence. A manifest weight challenge 

questions the credibility of the evidence presented and examines whether the State 

met its burden of persuasion at trial. State v. Whitsett, 2014-Ohio-4933, ¶ 26 (8th 

Dist.), citing Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 at 387; State v. Bowden, 2009-Ohio3598, ¶ 13 (8th Dist.), citing Thompkins at 390. A reviewing court “weighs the 

evidence and all reasonable inferences, considers the credibility of witnesses and 

determines whether in resolving conflicts in the evidence, the jury clearly lost its way 

and created such a manifest miscarriage of justice that the conviction must be 

reversed and a new trial ordered.” State v. Martin, 20 Ohio App.3d 172 (1st Dist.

1983), paragraph three of the syllabus. When considering an appellant’s claim that 

a conviction is against the manifest weight of the evidence, the court of appeals sits 

as a “thirteenth juror” and may disagree with the factfinder’s resolution of the 

conflicting testimony. Thompkins at 387, citing Tibbs v. Florida, 457 U.S. 31, 42 

(1982). A reversal on the basis that a verdict is against the manifest weight of the 

evidence is granted “only in the exceptional case in which the evidence weighs 

heavily against the conviction.” Martin at paragraph three of the syllabus.
Harris argues that the independent witness testimony demonstrates 

that Davis was shot by a male clad in an orange hoodie — Khamante — who left the 

crime scene in a gray SUV with Williams and Embry. Harris argues that she is 

entitled to a second opportunity at trial because the majority of the trial evidence 

showed Khamante shot Davis.

As discussed above, the State presented evidence showing Harris shot 

Davis. Harris was at the crime scene and both Williams and Khamante testified she 

had a gun and fired a warning gunshot. Defense counsel thoroughly cross-examined 

Williams, Khamante, and all trial witnesses. The independent witnesses provided 

conflicting testimony. However, “‘an accused is not entitled to a reversal on manifest 

weight grounds merely because inconsistent evidence was presented at trial.’” State 

v. Taylor, 2015-Ohio-2490, ¶ 34 (10th Dist.), quoting State v. Rankin, 2011-Ohio5131, ¶ 29 (10th Dist.). “The jury, as trier of fact, may take into consideration a 

witness’s conflicting testimony in determining her credibility and the 

persuasiveness of her account by either discounting or resolving the discrepancies.” 

Id.

After reviewing the record in this case, we cannot say this is an 

“exceptional case” where the trial court clearly lost its way and created such a 

manifest miscarriage of justice that Harris’s convictions were against the manifest 

weight of the evidence. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 at 387. For the foregoing 

reasons, Harris’s second assignment of error is without merit and is overruled.
Jury Instruction

Harris argues in her third assignment of error that the trial court 

erred when it failed to provide a jury instruction on voluntary manslaughter. We 

review this assignment of error under an abuse-of-discretion standard. State v. 

Ladson, 2022-Ohio-3670, ¶ 26 (8th Dist.), citing State v. Williams, 2009-Ohio2026, ¶ 50 (8th Dist.).

“[A] defendant charged with murder is entitled to an instruction on 

voluntary manslaughter when the evidence presented at trial would reasonably 

support both an acquittal on the charged crime of murder and a conviction for 

voluntary manslaughter.” State v. Shane, 63 Ohio St.3d 630, 632 (1992), citing 

State v. Tyler, 50 Ohio St.3d 24, 37 (1990). “The trial judge must determine whether 

evidence of reasonably sufficient provocation occasioned by the victim has been 

presented to warrant such an instruction.” Shane at paragraph one of syllabus. To 

make that determination, the trial court must establish whether the terms of the 

voluntary manslaughter statute, R.C. 2903.03, are met. R.C. 2903.03 reads in 

relevant part:

No person, while under the influence of sudden passion or in a sudden 

fit of rage, either of which is brought on by serious provocation 

occasioned by the victim that is reasonably sufficient to incite the 

person into using deadly force, shall knowingly cause the death of 

another or the unlawful termination of another’s pregnancy.

Harris argues that Khamante “was being smashed and trapped inside 

a car door and he could not get away.” Appellant’s brief, p. 30. Harris argues that 
this action by Davis sufficiently provoked her and, therefore, Harris was justified in 

shooting Davis to free Khamante.

The evidence reflects that Khamante remained wedged in the car door 

until Davis was shot. However, Khamante testified that he did not yell while at the 

apartment complex and he was “chill” during his encounter with Davis. Khamante 

denied that he and Davis fought but stated Davis pushed the car door. We disagree 

that this constitutes sufficient evidence to warrant a jury instruction on voluntary 

manslaughter. We agree with the trial court’s conclusion that these actions 

demonstrated insufficient provocation for purposes of R.C. 2903.03(A).

In light of this evidence, we cannot say that the trial court abused its 

discretion when it denied Harris’s request to issue a jury instruction on voluntary 

manslaughter. Thus, Harris’s third assignment of error is overruled.

Judgment affirmed.

It is ordered that appellee recover from appellant costs herein taxed.

The court finds there were reasonable grounds for this appeal.

It is ordered that a special mandate issue out of this court directing the 

common pleas court to carry this judgment into execution. The defendant’s 

conviction having been affirmed, any bail pending appeal is terminated. Case 

remanded to the trial court for execution of sentence.
A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to Rule 27 

of the Rules of Appellate Procedure.

________________________

MARY EILEEN KILBANE, JUDGE

EILEEN A. GALLAGHER, P.J., and

EMANUELLA D. GROVES, J., CONCUR