Opinion ID: 7089211
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: More Other-Acts Evidence

Text: {¶ 168} Statement implying possible theft by Tench: Raymond Hull, a former general manager of the Old Carolina Barbecue in Strongsville, had originally hired Tench as a cook, promoted him to assistant general manager, and regarded himself as a mentor and father figure to Tench. On cross-examination, Hull testified that he had never had a problem with Tench. {¶ 169} On redirect examination, Hull testified that Tench had run the restaurant's booth at a September 2013 cook-off. The prosecutor asked whether there had been any concerns about how Tench had performed his job. Hull responded: There was some concerns but that was just speculation. There was nothing I could prove because sometimes the bank wasn't adding up to what it should have been so, you know, with us being brand-new and everything, we didn't know what the costs were and what was going out and what was coming in. (Emphasis added.) The defense did not object to either the question or the answer. {¶ 170} Hull's testimony conveyed to the jury that he suspected Tench of stealing from the restaurant. Had there been any proof implicating Tench in such activity, it might have been relevant on redirect, because cross-examination had elicited that Hull had never had a problem with Tench. But as Hull frankly admitted, he had no such proof and was merely speculating. Absent substantial proof that the alleged other acts were committed by Tench, Hull's suspicions were irrelevant. See Lowe , 69 Ohio St.3d at 530 , 634 N.E.2d 616 . {¶ 171} Drug evidence: BCI agent George Staley testified that on November 14, 2013, he went to the Brunswick police station to search Tench's Ford F-150 truck. In the driver's-side door pocket, he found a ziplock baggie containing a substance that he suspected was an illegal drug. Staley identified two photographs of the suspected drug, one of which was later admitted. A BCI forensic  scientist who tested the substance in the baggie testified that it was alpha-PVP, a Schedule I stimulant also known as bath salts. The defense did not object to the testimony or the photos. (At the end of the state's case, the defense did object, unsuccessfully, to the admission of the actual drug bag.) {¶ 172} Additionally, a United States Secret Service agent testified that he had extracted the data from Tench's cell phone. He identified two photographs  found on the phone that depicted a clear baggie containing a crystalline substance. {¶ 173} Again, this evidence was completely irrelevant. There was no evidence connecting the murder of Tench's mother with drugs in any way. We have held that evidence of a defendant's drug addiction was admissible to prove the defendant's need for money, providing a motive to rob and kill. State v. Henness , 79 Ohio St.3d 53 , 61, 679 N.E.2d 686 (1997). But in this case, there was no evidence that Tench was a drug addict or even a user at the time of the murder. {¶ 174} Also, the state's theory of motive had nothing to do with drug use. Tench was alleged to have killed his mother not to obtain money (as in Henness ) but to prevent her from reporting thefts he had already committed. (At oral argument, the state asserted that Tench had a lot to gain    in terms of an inheritance, but the state presented no such theory to the trier of fact.) See State v. Hutton , 53 Ohio St.3d 36 , 40, 559 N.E.2d 432 (1990) (rejecting state's claim on appeal that other-act evidence was admissible to prove a particular motive for murder, after state had consistently argued in favor of a different motive at trial). And the drug evidence was not needed to prove that Tench had committed those thefts-the state introduced into evidence copies of the forged checks and expert testimony that the forgeries were in Tench's handwriting. Thus, it was error to admit this evidence. {¶ 175} Google search: A United States Secret Service agent examined the hard drive of the Dell computer seized from the basement of the Tench house. He testified that someone had typed the phrase kill someone without getting caught into the Google search engine, although he could not determine when this was done. The computer had last been shut down on April 11, 2013. That computer was registered to Jimmy and Aubrey; Tench, by his own admission, was known as Jimmy. Tench also testified at trial that a former girlfriend of his was named Aubrey. {¶ 176} Typing that phrase into the computer was directly relevant evidence of intent, planning, and preparation. The state did not attempt to draw any inferences about Tench's character from it. Finally, we see no likelihood of unfair prejudice. Thus, admitting evidence of the Google search was not plain error.