State v. Gatewood

177 N.E.3d 693

STATE of Ohio, Plainitff-Appellee,

v.Rashawn GATEWOOD, Defendant-Appellant.

NO. C-190654

Court of Appeals of Ohio, First District, Hamilton County.

Date of Judgment Entry on Appeal: September 22, 2021

Joseph T. Deters, Hamilton County Prosecuting Attorney, and Keith Sauter, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for Plaintiff-Appellee State of Ohio.

Raymond T. Faller, Hamilton County Public Defender, and Krista Gieske, Assistant Public Defender, for Defendant-Appellant Rashawn Gatewood.

OPINION.

Crouse, Judge.

{¶1} Defendant-appellant Rashawn Gatewood appeals his convictions for felonious assault and having weapons while under a disability. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

I. Facts and Procedure

{¶2} On May 31, 2018, Gatewood shot Dontay Jackson. The following testimony was presented at trial.

{¶3} Gatewood testified that his 14-year-old daughter told him that 21-year-old Jackson had inappropriately touched her. Jackson was an extended family member of Antwanette King, Gatewood's girlfriend and the mother of his children. Gatewood and King immediately went to Jackson's house. Gatewood's cousin, John Shields, and longtime friend, Chris Marlow, rode with them. Gatewood testified that they had no knowledge of the alleged sexual assault and remained in the vehicle at all relevant times.

{¶4} Jackson lived with his mother (and King's cousin), Melinda Brown, and his 17-year-old sister, Je'da Brown, on the second floor of a multifamily house. When Gatewood and King arrived, Je'da and Melinda were present and invited them inside. Gatewood told Melinda that he wanted to speak to Jackson about his daughter. The testimony differed as to what happened next. The state's witnesses testified that Jackson soon came downstairs, appearing as if he had just awoken. The defense witnesses conversely testified that Melinda called Jackson, and shortly thereafter, he entered through the front door. Upon seeing Jackson, Gatewood asked to talk to him outside. Jackson agreed.

{¶5} Gatewood and Jackson walked down the stairs, distantly followed by Je'da, King, and Melinda. Melinda testified that she saw Gatewood putting on gloves in the stairwell. Jackson testified that Gatewood was wearing gloves when he reached the bottom of the stairwell.

{¶6} Once outside, Gatewood asked Jackson, "Did you touch my daughter?" Jackson replied, "Who's your daughter?" The conversation repeated. Gatewood then pulled out a 9 mm semiautomatic pistol and shot Jackson in the leg. The conversation lasted less than one minute. The state's witnesses testified there was no yelling, arguing, or physical altercation before the gunshot.

{¶7} Gatewood testified that he shot Jackson in self-defense. According to Gatewood, Jackson disingenuously denied knowing his daughter, so Gatewood threatened to call the police. The defense witnesses testified that Jackson began yelling at Gatewood, calling him a "police ass nigger" for wanting to involve the police. Gatewood testified that Jackson then reached behind his back and lunged forward. Shields and Marlow testified that Jackson was reaching for a black handle. Gatewood testified that he instinctively pulled out his gun and shot Jackson in the leg. According to Gatewood, "I feared for my life." At the time of the offense, Gatewood had a concealed-carry permit issued by the state of Virginia.

{¶8} After Gatewood shot him in the leg, Jackson fled. Jackson ran through the house, into the backyard, over a fence, and eventually collapsed in the stairwell to a neighbor's basement. Gatewood also left the scene and eventually turned himself in at the police station. The police officers searched Gatewood's vehicle and seized three firearms and a bulletproof vest. At the time of his arrest, Gatewood had a 1999 juvenile adjudication for the commission of an offense that would have constituted felonious assault.

{¶9} Gatewood was charged with two counts of felonious assault and one count of having weapons while under a disability. Following a seven-day jury trial, Gatewood was found guilty on all counts and sentenced to an aggregate six-year prison term. Gatewood timely appealed, raising the following assignments of error for our review:

1. The imposition of a guilty verdict for the offense of having weapons while under disability by way of a juvenile adjudication which the state failed to prove involved a disability-creating offense violated Rashawn's due process rights and his right to bear arms under the Ohio and United States Constitutions.

2. The trial court erred in admitting the Ruger, Glock, bulletproof vest, and gloves at trial, and in failing to exclude the testimony of former police officer Thomas Rackley concerning arresting Rashawn as a juvenile in 1999, the collective impact of which prejudiced Rashawn and denied him a fair trial.

3. Rashawn was deprived of due process under the Ohio and United States Constitutions where his convictions for having weapons while under disability was obtained despite assertions from state and federal government officials informing him he could lawfully possess a firearm, otherwise known as entrapment by estoppel.

4. Rashawn's convictions for felonious assault and having weapons while under disability were not supported by sufficient evidence and/or ran contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence.

II. Weapons Under Disability

{¶10} In his first assignment of error, Gatewood challenges his conviction for having weapons while under a disability on several grounds.

A. Disability-Creating Offense

{¶11} Gatewood first challenges the sufficiency of the evidence establishing a disability-creating offense.¹ Gatewood argues that the state failed to prove that he was previously adjudicated delinquent for a felony offense of violence. Gatewood claims that he was charged with felonious assault, but admitted to and was adjudicated delinquent of a lesser offense.

{¶12} We review challenges to the sufficiency of the evidence to assess whether, after viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the state, "any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime proven beyond a reasonable doubt." State v. Jenks , 61 Ohio St.3d 259, 574 N.E.2d 492 (1991), paragraph two of the syllabus.

{¶13} Gatewood was convicted of having weapons under a disability under R.C. 2923.13, which provides:

(A) Unless relieved from disability under operation of law or legal process, no person shall knowingly acquire, have, carry, or use any firearm or dangerous ordnance, if any of the following apply:

(2) The person * * * has been adjudicated a delinquent child for the commission of an offense that, if committed by an adult, would have been a felony offense of violence.

{¶14} The existence of a prior adjudication is an essential element of R.C. 2923.13. State v. Williams , 197 Ohio App.3d 505, 2011-Ohio-6267, 968 N.E.2d 27, ¶ 7 (1st Dist.). "Whenever in any case it is necessary to prove a prior conviction, a certified copy of the entry of judgment in such prior conviction together with evidence sufficient to identify the defendant named in the entry as the offender in the case at bar, is sufficient to prove such prior conviction." R.C. 2945.75(B)(1).

{¶15} In this case, the state offered into evidence the certified judicial entry of adjudication and identification testimony from the 1999 arresting officer. The judicial entry was captioned:

/99/01843 X

HENDON

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF HAMILTON COUNTY, OHIO

JUVENILE DIVISION

RASHAWN GATEWOOD

FELONIOUS ASSAULT

The body of the entry contained handwritten notations from every court appearance. On "3-9-99," the judge wrote "Change plea to admit. Adjudicate delinquent. Place on probation for investigation." Kristie Davis, the Chief Deputy Clerk for the Hamilton County Juvenile Court, testified that the judicial entry showed Gatewood was adjudicated delinquent for felonious assault on March 9, 1999.

{¶16} Viewing it in a light most favorable to the state, the judicial entry (along with Davis's testimony) sufficiently established that Gatewood was adjudicated delinquent for felonious assault on March 9, 1999. The caption plainly stated "FELONIOUS ASSAULT" and the entry provided, "Change plea to admit. Adjudicate delinquent." Nonetheless, the state further supplemented the judicial entry with the accompanying complaint and a record of complaints.

{¶17} The complaint charged Gatewood with knowingly causing serious physical harm to another in violation of R.C. 2903.11, a felony of the second degree. The record of complaints listed:

Case No: /99/001843 X	Date of Filing: 02/04/1999
Complaint: Felonious Assault	Offense Date: 02/04/1999
Degree: F2 Section: 2903.11

On "03/09/1999," the record stated "Changed plea to admit." and "Adjudged delinquent." Davis testified that the record of complaints again showed Gatewood was adjudicated delinquent for felonious assault on March 9, 1999. On cross-examination, Davis explained, "Had the charge been reduced, it would not appear as felonious assault on the rap sheet. * * * If Gatewood pled to a reduced charge, it would have been noted."

{¶18} The state also presented testimony from Thomas Rackley, the arresting officer in the 1999 case. Rackley testified that on February 4, 1999, he arrested Gatewood for felonious assault and aggravated robbery. Rackley confirmed that the defendant in this case was the same Rashawn Gatewood in the 1999 case. Rackley stated, "His facial features haven't changed in over 20 years. He still has what I describe like a baby face. He also has the same similar smirk that he had back in that time."

{¶19} Gatewood testified in his own defense. He did not dispute that he was the defendant named in the entry, but he claimed that he admitted to a lesser offense, not felonious assault. Gatewood testified, "I don't know what the exact charge was. I know they dropped it down to a lesser charge." Gatewood admitted that the judicial entry showed he was "adjudged delinquent of felonious...