Youngstown Daily Legal News

Court rejects appeal from man who was caught making meth in a camper

ANNIE YAMSON
Special to the Legal News
Published: March 15, 2016

The 9th District Court of Appeals recently released an opinion affirming several drug-related convictions for a Wayne County man who made meth in a camper.

In 2013, David Yoakem was found guilty by a jury in the Wayne County Court of Common Pleas of aggravated possession of methamphetamine exceeding 150 grams, possessing criminal tools and illegal use of possession of drug paraphernalia.

In a separate case from 2014, Yoakem pleaded guilty to one count of illegal assembly of chemicals and one count of possession of heroin.

At a joint sentencing hearing, the trial court merged some counts and imposed a seven-year prison term for aggravated possession along with a concurrent one-year prison term for the criminal tools count.

Appealing from that judgment, Yoakem’s first argument was that his convictions were not supported by sufficient evidence and were against the manifest weight of the evidence.

“This court disagrees,” Presiding Judge Donna Carr wrote on behalf of a three-judge appellate panel. “Reviewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the state, this court concludes that any rational trier of fact could have found that the essential elements of the charges of aggravated possession of methamphetamine, possessing criminal tools and illegal use or possession of drug paraphernalia were proved beyond a reasonable doubt.”

According to the evidence presented at Yoakem’s trial, he was living at a camper on Aug. 24, 2013 and was found hiding inside when law enforcement attempted to serve him with an outstanding warrant.

Two witnesses testified that Yoakem supplied them with meth that he had made in the camper and the state presented evidence that numerous substances and instruments used to manufacture meth were found in the trailer a day after a confidential informant reported that Yoakem would be cooking meth there.

More than 220 grams of meth was found in a jar inside the camper.

Considering the record, the appellate panel held that the state presented sufficient evidence to establish all of the charged crimes. And, after a thorough review, it also ruled that the evidence did not weigh heavily in favor of Yoakem.

“The weight of the evidence supports the conclusion that Yoakem possessed methamphetamine in an amount exceeding 50 times the bulk amount,” Carr wrote. “Although he claimed to have moved out of the camper prior to Aug. 24, 2013, the evidence indicated that he still used the camper, maintained his belongings there and returned there frequently even if he may have been sleeping on a friend’s couch for a few weeks.”

Yoakem claimed that someone must have broken into the camper. Rather than report the incident to the police, case summary states that he “brought his girlfriend, her tiny dog and some personal items to investigate the situation.”

“After law enforcement arrived at the camper to serve outstanding warrants, Yoakem still did not attempt to report a break-in,” Carr wrote, noting the absence of broken locks or any sign of forced entry.

“Accordingly, it was reasonable for the trier of fact to believe that Yoakem still possessed and exerted control over everything found in his camper.”

Among those items were packets that contained pseudoephedrine, tubing, chemicals and a jar of meth — all items that favored the state’s position and led the court of appeals to overrule Yoakem’s first assignment of error.

In a second and final assigned error, Yoakem claimed the trial court erred when it sentenced him based on its belief that he was guilty of charges on which the jury had acquitted him.

The court of appeals quickly disposed of that claim, pointing to a “well established rule that a sentencing judge may take into account facts introduced at trial relating to other charges, even ones of which the defendant has been acquitted.”

Carr noted that, as long as not guilty verdicts did not form the sole basis for the sentence, the trial court was free to consider any information related to the proceedings.

“Accordingly, the sentencing court committed no impropriety,” Carr concluded.

Both of Yoakem’s assignments of error overruled, the court of appeals affirmed the judgment of the Wayne County court with Judges Beth Whitmore and Carla Moore concurring.

The case is cited State v. Yoakem, 2016-Ohio-745.

[Back]