Youngstown Daily Legal News

Man who shot victim nine times loses appeal

ANNIE YAMSON
Special to the Legal News
Published: February 14, 2014

The 9th District Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment of the Summit County Court of Common Pleas this week when it found that Tramell Wilson was properly convicted of felonious assault.

Wilson was indicted on two counts of felonious assault, each with a repeat violent offender specification, and one count of having weapons while under disability.

A jury trial resulted in guilty verdicts on all charges despite the fact that no physical evidence was introduced connecting Wilson to the crimes and the state’s case largely relied on the two victims’ identification of Wilson as the suspect.

He was sentenced to a total of 21 years in prison.

The convictions stemmed from a shooting that took place in the early morning hours of June 18, 2011.

The victims, Deontrae Minor and De’Andre Tucker, were standing in the parking lot of a nightclub in Akron when they made eye contact with Wilson.

Both men testified that they had never met Wilson before and had never seen him prior to that night.

Wilson approached the men and pulled out a gun, pointing it at Minor.

According to Minor, Wilson shot the gun between his legs but missed, leaving a hole in his shorts.

Wilson then proceeded to turn to Tucker and ask, “You want some?”

Tucker testified that he offered Wilson anything he wanted in an effort to persuade him to lower his weapon but, without answering, Wilson shot him.

As Tucker fell to the ground, Wilson continued shooting, hitting Tucker nine times in the back and legs. He then “calmly” walked away from the scene.

Tucker survived with serious injuries and, two days after the shooting, he and Minor separately identified Wilson as the suspect from a photo line-up.

Wilson eluded the police for more than six months but was apprehended in February 2012.

Among his several assignments of error upon appeal, Wilson argued that his conviction for felonious assault was not supported by the manifest weight of the evidence.

According to him, there was no physical evidence connecting Wilson to the shooting, a van that police initially thought was used by Wilson was never linked to him, the gun was never located, there was no evidence of a motive, a witness testified that Wilson was not the shooter and he claimed that the photo array shown to the victims was “flawed and suggestive” and their testimony unreliable.

The 9th District’s three-judge appellate panel found no merit to Wilson’s arguments though it did agree that there was no physical evidence that linked him to the crime.

Akron Police Officer Michael Rinn testified during trial that six ammunition casings and two bullet slugs recovered at the scene were not tested for DNA or fingerprints because that evidence would have been destroyed after the bullets were fired.

Wilson also claimed that a blue van initially thought to be his was never located but the court of appeals, after reviewing trial testimony, found that the blue van was not relevant.

It found that the police had pursued that line of investigation but later dropped it.

“There was no testimony from any witness, including Wilson’s own witness, that a blue van was present at the scene when the shooting occurred,” wrote Judge Jennifer Hensal on behalf of the appellate panel. “Given the witnesses’ testimony, whether a blue van was connected to Wilson is of minor relevance.”

The court also found that the lack of a motive did not prevent the jury from finding Wilson guilty.

“The question of motive is generally relevant in all criminal trials, even though prosecutions need not prove motive in order to secure a conviction,” wrote Judge Hensal, citing State v. Curry. “The state, therefore, was not required to establish a motive for the shooting.”

The court of appeals went on to state that the credibility of witness testimony was for the jury to decide and that the police followed proper protocol when they presented Minor and Tucker with photo arrays.

“Based on our review of the record, this court does not find that the jury clearly lost its way in convicting Wilson of felonious assault,” Judge Hensal concluded.

The appellate panel overruled other assignments of error, including claims that Wilson’s counsel was ineffective.

It did, however, remand the case in order for the Summit County court to apply State v. Johnson and consider whether Wilson’s offenses should have merged for sentencing.

Presiding Judge Carla Moore and Judge Donna Carr concurred.

The case is cited State v. Wilson, 2014-Ohio-376.

[Back]