Youngstown Daily Legal News

Man who helped ambush, rob victims loses appeal

ANNIE YAMSON
Special to the Legal News
Published: July 1, 2014

In Ohio’s 8th District, a three-judge panel in the court of appeals recently affirmed the judgment of the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas, which convicted defendant Antoine Tate on charges related to a robbery.

Tate was tried to the bench after waiving his right to a jury trial and was found guilty of aggravated robbery, kidnapping and drug possession, all with firearm specifications, as well as theft, possession of criminal tools and tampering with evidence.

He was ordered to serve a total of eight years in prison.

Case summary states that Tate’s convictions resulted from an incident that occurred shortly after 10 p.m. on Dec. 10, 2012.

The victim, Demetrius Patterson, testified that he drove with his girlfriend, Charise Littlejohn, to his cousin’s apartment.

Patterson wanted his cousin to repair Littlejohn’s computer.

When they arrived, Patterson exited the car and approached his cousin’s apartment building while Littlejohn gathered some items from the car.

Before Littlejohn could join Patterson, two men came around the corner of the building and put a gun to Patterson’s head.

The man with the gun, later identified as Tate, demanded that Patterson “give (him) everything.”

Littlejohn watched as Tate struck Patterson with the gun and knocked him down.

Tate then handed the gun to his accomplice, Demetrius Smith, and began beating Patterson and going through his pockets.

As the robbery took place, Littlejohn called the police and told the dispatcher that Patterson was being robbed and beaten.

She provided her location and a description of the assailants.

She was speaking with the dispatcher when Smith handed the gun back to Tate and the two men walked away.

Police arrived within one minute of the incident.

While officer Kyle Flagg spoke with Littlejohn and Patterson, officers Demetrius Jackson and Larry Jones noticed two men who matched the description of the assailants walking less than 100 feet from the scene.

Jackson drove over to them and stopped the patrol car in front of the two men.

Tate took off running and Jackson pursued while Jones stayed behind and arrested Smith.

Jones was escorting Smith to the patrol car when Patterson drove up to that location, jumped out of his vehicle and exclaimed, “That’s him. That’s one of them.”

Patterson identified Smith and shortly thereafter found his cellphone within a few feet from where Smith had been detained.

Meanwhile, Jackson pursued Tate and observed him remove a gun from his waistband and toss it on top of an overhang connected to a nearby home.

Eventually, Tate was subdued with the use of a stun gun and officers found a bag of crack cocaine and more than $200 in cash on his person.

Tate was placed next to Smith in the rear of Jones’ patrol car.

The officers testified that the two men put their heads together and whispered for a few moments before Smith stated, “All right. The gun’s mine and the drugs is his.”

In his defense, Tate testified that he and Smith had been called to the address to sell drugs to Patterson.

According to him, after receiving the drugs, Patterson pulled out a gun.

Tate told the court that he and Smith wrestled the gun from Patterson and then ran away.

The trial court found Tate guilty of all charges with the exception of a drug trafficking count.

The court imposed a three-year prison sentence on the firearm specification to be served prior to a consecutive to five years on the aggravated robbery.

The other sentences were ordered to be served concurrently for a total of eight years in prison.

Upon his appeal, Tate challenged the manifest weight of the evidence supporting his convictions.

“In his first assignment of error, Tate argues that the version of the incident that he provided during his testimony is the more believable one,” wrote Presiding Judge Kenneth Rocco on behalf of the court of appeals. “A review of the record does not compel this court to agree.”

The appellate panel noted that the state’s witnesses at trial presented a “logical, compelling account” of the robbery.

Tate never wavered in his identification of the suspects and Littlejohn was able to corroborate every aspect of his account.

On the other hand, Tate’s version of events was “obviously self-serving,” according to the court of appeals.

“If he and Smith were the victims of an attack by an opportunistic drug buyer as Tate claimed, there would have been little reason for Tate to run from the officers while Patterson stayed, and less reason to throw the gun away but not the drugs,” wrote Rocco.

Based on the trial testimony, the appellate panel concluded that the trial court did not lose its way when it found Tate guilty of the robbery and kidnapping charges.

Tate, however, went on to argue that his total sentence should be reversed because it was more than the minimum and the court failed to cite the required statutory sentencing factors.

“Tate’s argument is rejected,” wrote Judge Rocco. “A trial court has full discretion to impose a prison sentence within the statutory range.”

The court of appeals ruled that Tate was unable to overcome the presumption that the trial court did consider the appropriate statutory factors, especially in light of the fact that the court specifically stated on the record and in its journal entry that it had “considered the required factors of the law.”

Ultimately, judges Patricia Blackmon and Tim McCormack joined Judge Rocco in overruling both of Tate’s assignments of error and affirming the judgment and sentence handed down in the Cuyahoga County court.

The case is cited State v. Tate, 2014-Ohio-2394.

[Back]