Case Law State v. Garcia-Rodriguez

State v. Garcia-Rodriguez

Document Cited Authorities (21) Cited in Related

Michael C. O'Malley, Cuyahoga County Prosecuting Attorney, and Kevin R. Filiatraut, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.

Edward M. Heindel, Cleveland, for appellant.

JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION

MARY EILEEN KILBANE, P.J.

{¶ 1} Defendant-appellant Wilfredo Garcia-Rodriguez ("Garcia-Rodriguez"), appeals from his convictions and sentencing following a jury trial. For the following reasons, we affirm.

Factual and Procedural History

{¶ 2} On January 26, 2018, in Cuyahoga C.P. No. CR-18-625204-A, a Cuyahoga County Grand Jury indicted Garcia-Rodriguez on one count of aggravated murder in violation of R.C. 2903.01(B), one count of aggravated murder in violation of R.C. 2903.01(A), one count of aggravated burglary in violation of R.C. 2911.11(A)(1), one count of aggravated robbery in violation of R.C. 2911.01(A)(3), one count of aggravated robbery in violation of R.C. 2911.01(A)(1), two counts of kidnapping in violation of R.C. 2905.01(A)(2), one count of kidnapping in violation of R.C. 2905.01(A)(3), and one count of having weapons while under disability in violation of R.C. 2923.13(A)(2). Except for the charge of having weapons while under disability, the charges carried one- and three-year firearm specifications, notice of prior conviction specifications, and repeat violent offender specifications.

{¶ 3} On January 31, 2018, Garcia-Rodriquez pleaded not guilty to the indictment. On July 31, 2018, the court granted a motion to appoint an interpreter on behalf of Garcia-Rodriguez. On September 11, 2018, the trial court referred Garcia-Rodriguez for an evaluation by the court psychiatric clinic. On April 16, 2019, a plea offer was placed on the record. On August 1, 2019, Garcia-Rodriguez filed a motion for an independent psychological evaluation and appointment of a specific psychologist to assist in his defense. On August 6, 2019, the trial court denied Garcia-Rodriguez's request for a specific psychologist but granted his request to undergo a supplemental psychological evaluation with the court psychiatric clinic. On November 19, 2019, following a hearing, the trial court found Garcia-Rodriguez competent to stand trial.

{¶ 4} Between March 2, 2020, and January 22, 2021, the court observed Covid-19 protocols, granted continuances on pretrial hearings and trial dates, and held pretrial hearings. On April 6, 2021, Garcia-Rodriguez filed a motion to suppress the videotaped recordings of his custodial interrogations that took place on January 16, 2018, and January 17, 2018. On June 7, 2021, the court held a hearing on the motion to suppress, and the court subsequently denied Garcia-Rodriguez's motion.

{¶ 5} On September 13, 2021, Garcia-Rodriguez waived his right to a jury trial on Count 9, having weapons while under disability charge, and the repeat violent offender and notice of prior conviction specifications associated with Counts 1 through 8 of the indictment. On the same date, the case proceeded to a jury trial on the remaining charges.

{¶ 6} The charges against Garcia-Rodriguez arose from an incident on January 7, 2018, that resulted in the murder of James Dowell ("Jimbo"). The following summaries describe the trial testimony offered by the participants, witnesses, and investigating officers.

E.R.

{¶ 7} Garcia-Rodriguez lived with his girlfriend, Cassandra Roman, and her family members including her 14-year-old son E.R. E.R. considered Garcia-Rodriguez a father-figure until several months prior to this incident when their relationship began to deteriorate due to Garcia-Rodriguez's use of crack cocaine.

{¶ 8} E.R. testified that as he walked home from his cousin's house on January 7, 2018, he observed his mom's car parked in the driveway of a house he passed. E.R. did not know who lived at the home, but he knocked on the front door to inquire why his mom's car was parked there. Garcia-Rodriguez answered the door; Garcia-Rodriguez was accompanied by another man, Tito.1 This was E.R.’s first encounter with Tito although he may have observed Tito with Garcia-Rodriguez on a few prior occasions. Both Garcia-Rodriguez and Tito were dressed in black and wore gloves. Garcia-Rodriguez informed E.R. that the men planned to rob Jimbo. The men instructed E.R. to get into Tito's green Honda Accord because he could help them with the robbery.

{¶ 9} Inside the car, Tito sat in the driver's seat with Garcia-Rodriguez in the front passenger seat and E.R. in the rear seat. Tito pointed a baby blue gun at E.R. and threatened to kill his family if E.R. told anyone about the robbery. Tito gave E.R. ten dollars with which he was to purchase marijuana from Jimbo. E.R. knew Jimbo both as a family friend with whom E.R. had been acquainted with since he was five years old and as E.R.’s marijuana dealer. Tito drove to Jimbo's house and parked in the alley behind the home. E.R. denied that he or anyone else called Jimbo as they drove to Jimbo's home.

{¶ 10} Garcia-Rodriguez instructed E.R. to knock on Jimbo's back door, enter the house, and purchase marijuana. E.R. knocked at the back door, and Jimbo permitted him entry to the house. A female friend of Jimbo's, Savannah Alley ("Savannah"), was also present in the kitchen. As E.R. handed Jimbo money for the drugs, Garcia-Rodriguez and Tito entered the back door wearing face masks and carrying guns.

{¶ 11} Garcia-Rodriguez and Tito ordered Jimbo, Savannah, and E.R. to get on the ground. Garcia-Rodriguez pointed his gun at Jimbo and demanded he hand over marijuana and money. Garcia-Rodriguez and Jimbo fought over possession of the gun while Tito stood to the side and pointed his gun at Jimbo. During the struggle between Garcia-Rodriguez and Jimbo, Garcia-Rodriguez's gun was pointed at E.R. which caused E.R. to stand up and lean against the wall. Garcia-Rodriguez's gun went off although no one was shot. Savannah stood up and ran from the room. Tito picked up Garcia-Rodriguez's gun from the ground, pistol-whipped Jimbo and shot Jimbo twice with that gun — once in the upper arm and once in the head. E.R. testified that at some point, Tito removed a roll of duct tape from his pocket and attempted to wrap tape around Jimbo's arm. E.R. also testified that while these acts took place, Garcia-Rodriguez and Tito spoke in Spanish, which E.R. did not understand.

{¶ 12} After Tito shot Jimbo, Tito pointed the gun at E.R. and told him to grab the marijuana bag from the kitchen table and get in the car. E.R. complied with those demands. E.R. gave conflicting testimony as to how Tito and Garcia-Rodriguez left the house. E.R. initially stated that he left first, followed by Tito holding the gun and then Garcia-Rodriguez. E.R. later testified that Garcia-Rodriguez left the house first followed by himself and then Tito.

{¶ 13} Tito drove the three individuals from Jimbo's house back to Tito's house. E.R. described Tito as "very excited" during the drive while Garcia-Rodriguez sat quietly. Upon arriving at Tito's home, E.R. exited the car, walked home, and never spoke with anyone about the events that took place at Jimbo's home until January 16, 2018, when E.R. was approached by the police.

{¶ 14} On January 16, 2018, Cleveland Police Detective Jody Remington ("Detective Remington") and FBI Special Agent Brian Young ("Agent Young") questioned E.R. at his school. E.R. testified that he was not initially honest with Detective Remington and Agent Young because he was scared, he wanted to protect Garcia-Rodriguez, and he feared Tito. E.R.’s lies included statements that he did not know Tito or maybe he had seen him around; that Garcia-Rodriguez and Tito picked E.R. up while he was walking and he thought they were going to Jimbo's to buy marijuana; that E.R. called Jimbo from his friend's home; that E.R. was lying face-down during the robbery and he did not see anything; and that E.R. never saw Tito's face unmasked. After being questioned and returning home, E.R. told Garcia-Rodriguez that he had spoken with Detective Remington and Agent Young. Garcia-Rodriguez contacted the police, and both Garcia-Rodriguez and E.R. turned themselves into the police that night.

{¶ 15} E.R. was charged with and pled guilty to murder. As part of the plea agreement, the state agreed not to attempt bindover, which could result in E.R. being tried in adult court, and E.R. agreed to testify against Garcia-Rodriguez and Tito. E.R.’s probation was dependent upon his trial testimony.

Savannah Alley

{¶ 16} Savannah testified that she was Jimbo's best friend and she accompanied him daily when he sold marijuana either outside or inside his home. On January 7, 2018, Savannah and Jimbo were completing drug sales outside his house when Jimbo received a phone call from E.R. E.R. wanted to meet Jimbo at his home and purchase marijuana. Jimbo and Savannah smoked marijuana on their way back to Jimbo's home; Savannah was high during the events that occurred that evening.

{¶ 17} While Savannah and Jimbo were in the kitchen, E.R. knocked at the back door and Jimbo let him into the house. Jimbo asked E.R. where Garcia-Rodriguez was, and E.R. stated he did not know. Savannah had seen Jimbo sell marijuana previously to Garcia-Rodriguez, and on one such occasion, E.R. was with Garcia-Rodriguez. While Jimbo weighed marijuana at the kitchen table, two masked men entered the house. Savannah did not identify the men but differentiated them by describing one as chubby and the other as skinny. Savannah testified the skinny assailant's build was comparable to Garcia-Rodriguez's build.

{¶ 18} Upon the men's entry into the house, the chubby assailant put Savannah's hands behind her back, a gun to her head, and forced her to the ground. E.R. stood in the kitchen as Jimbo fought with the skinny man. The two assailants spoke in Spanish and English to each other. She heard...

2 cases
Document | Ohio Court of Appeals – 2023
State v. Gibson
"... ... In order to determine if Gibson voluntarily spoke with the police, we must examine the totality of the circumstances of the confession. State v. Garcia-Rodriguez , 2022-Ohio-4283, 202 N.E.3d 729, ¶ 51 (8th Dist.) ; State v. Hudson , 2018-Ohio-981, 107 N.E.3d 1, ¶ 23 (4th Dist.), citing Oregon v. Bradshaw , 462 U.S. 1039, 103 S.Ct. 2830, 77 L.Ed.2d 405 (1983). Factors include "the age, mentality and prior criminal experience of the accused; the ... "
Document | Ohio Court of Appeals – 2023
State v. Burgos-Delgado
"... ... 216 N.E.3d 73 Procedural History {¶ 2} The first incident giving rise to indictment occurred on January 7, 2018, and was charged in Cuyahoga C.P. No. CR-18-625204. In that case, Burgos-Delgado and a codefendant, Wilfredo Garcia-Rodriguez, were charged with the following crimes relative to the homicide of James Dowell: Count 1, aggravated murder in violation of R.C. 2903.01(B) ; Count 2, aggravated murder in violation of R.C. 2903.01(A) ; Count 3, aggravated burglary in violation of R.C. 2911.11(A)(1) ; Count 4, aggravated robbery ... "

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Experience vLex's unparalleled legal AI

Access millions of documents and let Vincent AI power your research, drafting, and document analysis — all in one platform.

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
2 cases
Document | Ohio Court of Appeals – 2023
State v. Gibson
"... ... In order to determine if Gibson voluntarily spoke with the police, we must examine the totality of the circumstances of the confession. State v. Garcia-Rodriguez , 2022-Ohio-4283, 202 N.E.3d 729, ¶ 51 (8th Dist.) ; State v. Hudson , 2018-Ohio-981, 107 N.E.3d 1, ¶ 23 (4th Dist.), citing Oregon v. Bradshaw , 462 U.S. 1039, 103 S.Ct. 2830, 77 L.Ed.2d 405 (1983). Factors include "the age, mentality and prior criminal experience of the accused; the ... "
Document | Ohio Court of Appeals – 2023
State v. Burgos-Delgado
"... ... 216 N.E.3d 73 Procedural History {¶ 2} The first incident giving rise to indictment occurred on January 7, 2018, and was charged in Cuyahoga C.P. No. CR-18-625204. In that case, Burgos-Delgado and a codefendant, Wilfredo Garcia-Rodriguez, were charged with the following crimes relative to the homicide of James Dowell: Count 1, aggravated murder in violation of R.C. 2903.01(B) ; Count 2, aggravated murder in violation of R.C. 2903.01(A) ; Count 3, aggravated burglary in violation of R.C. 2911.11(A)(1) ; Count 4, aggravated robbery ... "

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex