state of Blanding | Ohio Court of Appeals | 28-02-2023 | (2023)


OHIO STATE JUDGE: Hon. William B. Hoffman, P.J. Plaintiffs-Defendants Hon. John W. Wise, J. Hon. Patricia A. Delaney, J. -vs- Case No. 2022CA00040 RANDY BLANDING

Opinion of the defendant-appellant

NATURE OF PROCEEDING: Stark County Court of Common Pleas Appeal, Case No. 2021-CR-2225

VERDICT: Confirmed



For Plaintiff-Respondent For Respondent-Appellant

KYLE L. STONE GEORGE URBAN Attorney 116 Cleveland Avenue, N.W. Stark County, Ohio Suite #808 Canton, Ohio 44702 VICKI L. DESANTIS Assistant District Attorney Appellate Division 110 Central Plaza South, Suite #510 Canton, Ohio 44702-1413 Hoffman, P.J. {¶1} Respondent/appellant Randy Aaron Blanding is appealing the judgment rendered

by the Stark County Court of Common Pleas, which convicted him of aggravated robbery (R.C.

2911.01(A)(1),(C)), grand theft of motor vehicle (R.C. 2913.02(A)(1)(B)(5)), two counts

petty theft (R.C. 2913.02(A)(1),(B)(2)), criminal damage or endangerment (R.C.

2909.06(A)(1),(B)) y amenaza grave (R.C. 2903.21(A),(B))

Established guilty and sentenced to a total of nine to thirteen and

year and a half. The plaintiff-opponent is the state of Ohio.


{¶2} The complainant was involved in a non-exclusive relationship

kg. in August 2021. K.G. lived with his friend D.D. in a duplex on 16th street in

Canton, Ohio.

{¶3} On August 4, 2021, K.G. spent the day with the complainant. wanted plaintiff

he had sex with KG but she refused because she was on her period. complainant at that time

{¶4} D. D. worked the afternoon shift and returned home before midnight. After

DD had gone to bed, the plaintiff knocked on the door. DD informed the complainant K.G. was not

house and did not let the applicant into the apartment. DD called KG to tell his whistleblower

I search. DD locked the bottom lock on the back doors of the duplex and left

to the bed.

{¶5} KG returned home and found the upper and lower locks in the front

and the back doors of the duplex were locked, which was unusual since usually only

He closed one of the two locks on each door. kg. I woke up asking about the locks.

DD said that he did not close the two locks. {¶6} KG then called the friend she had spent the night with to let him

Knowing that you made it home safe and sound. The applicant appeared suddenly while she was speaking and

He was holding a gun. He seemed upset and angry and he yelled at K.G. call the person

get back on the phone. DD was surprised to discover that the complainant was in the apartment when

she hadn't let him in. DD tried to grab her mobile phone but the applicant took the phone


{¶7} The applicant pointed the gun at K.G., who panicked because

(Video) Appeals court denies Ohio State's motion, allows Strauss lawsuits to proceed

had fought before, the plaintiff had not previously pointed a weapon at him. complainant

He picked up her jacket, dragged her into the hallway, and told K.G. call them males

friend back. On the phone with her friend K.G. asked the complainant to stop showing

pointing a gun, which alerted the plaintiff's boyfriend to the fact that she had a gun.

{¶8} At this point the complainant wanted out of the duplex and wanted D.D.

and K.G. with him. He ordered D.D. get up, but she wanted to get dressed first.

{¶9} KG tried to calm down the complainant. The plaintiff began to talk about suicide.

because he felt like he had screwed up. kg. she finally went to her bedroom. complainant

He followed her and asked her for sex again. kg. she subsequently performed oral sex on the applicant

with whom they had sex. kg. He said he doesn't think she has much of a choice.

but having sex with the complainant because he had a gun and was upset. Both K.G. AND

The applicant showered and went to bed.

{¶10} KG woke up around 5:30 AM. m. and found the applicant fully clothed

next to her and pointed the gun at her. The applicant informed K.G. He took his car and left.

r in the past, but only with your permission. kg. told the applicant not to take her car, but the applicant called someone to come and get her car

{¶11} of the shot sprayed the complainant with mace. The applicant ran back to the apartment. whistleblower attacked

DD i 284. Finally, the plaintiff D.D. go.

{¶12} KG and D.D. He tried to help the complainant with the action of the mace. complainant

He again stated that if the police showed up, he would kill everyone. The complainant left the

apartment, he struck two televisions with the butt of his gun, completely destroying them.

Left in his car, K.G. and DD went to the police station.

{¶13} Plaintiff was indicted as “aggravated” by the Stark County Grand Jury

Robbery, two counts of rape, aggravated robbery, aggravated robbery of a motor vehicle, two

Cases of theft, harassment in telecommunications, stalking threats, delinquency

Damage or endangerment, kidnapping in two cases and serious threat. He

The state filed a nolle prosequi on charges of telecom harassment

threat of harassment.

{¶14} The case proceeded to a jury trial in the Stark County Court of Common Pleas.

The applicant testified in court. He testified that when he arrived at the duplex the door was open.

open, and he had previously entered the duplex without knocking, so he entered.

He testified that he never drew a gun, and K.G. she had sexual intercourse with him voluntarily. He handed me back and told me no.

{¶15} The jury found the applicant guilty of aggravated robbery and grand theft of a motor

vehicle, two counts of petty theft, aggravated threats, and criminal damage or

Danger. The jury found the applicant not guilty of the remaining charges. the court of first instance

Total sentence of nine to thirteen and a half years. It's from March 17

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 2022 The appellant continues his appeal and points out as errors:


(Video) Court of Appeals questions state over judge taking away "constitutional right" of parents

{¶16} In determining whether a judgment against the apparent weight of

weighs the evidence and all reasonable conclusions, verifies the credibility of witnesses,

and determines whether there is such a manifest error of justice in the dissolution that the sentence should be revoked and

State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St. App. 3d 380, 387, 1997-Ohio-52, 678

N.E.2d 541, state v. Martin, 20 Ohio App. 3d 172, 175, 485 N.E. 2d 717 (1983).

{¶17} The role of an appellate court in reviewing the sufficiency of evidence

It will be determined whether after viewing the evidence in the most favorable light

prosecution, any reasonable fact-checker 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,

Second paragraph of the study plan (1991).

{¶18} To begin with, we note that the applicant's attorney made the following argument

to the jury in the closing argument:

Was the car stolen? Yes absolutely. you heard them

Your duty to plead guilty to these charges. His duty, ladies and


{¶19} Tr. (II) 208-09.

{¶20} The lawyer concluded his final argument as follows:

Ladies and gentlemen, on charges of rape, kidnapping,

aggravated robbery, acquitted of these charges. You have to pay the other fees.

find him guilty.

{¶21} Tr. (II) 211.

{¶22} Plaintiff first argues with the conviction for aggravated robbery,

Grand theft of a motor vehicle and petty theft of cell phones are against the manifesto

weight and sufficiency of proof. {¶23} Grand Theft is carried out by R.C. 2911.01(A)(1):

(A) Any person who attempts or commits the crime of robbery as defined

in Section 2913.01 of the Revised Code or when escaping immediately after

attempt or offense, you must do the following:

(1) Having a deadly weapon on or around the offender's body or under it

control of the offender and aim the weapon, brandish it, point it

that the author owns or uses it[.]

{¶24} offenses as follows:

(A) Any person with the intent to deprive the Owner of goods or services,

knowingly obtain or control property or Services

in one of the following ways:

(1) Without the consent of the owner or authorized person


{¶25} The applicant argues that he believed he could use the car on the day in question, despite the fact that there was an argument between them.

the two led to him being dumped by K.C. He argues that he had no intention of robbing her.

(Video) Ohio Supreme Court considering how minors accused of 'unproven' crimes in juvenile court can be trie

of the car since he returned it the same day. Similarly, he argues that he had no intention of killing K.G. and DD his phone numbers Argues, based on his testimony in court, that

never threatened anyone with a weapon and never drew the weapon even though it was on him


{¶26} But both K.G. and DD witnessed the complainant brandishing the weapon and

The entire time he was in the apartment, he threatened to kill anyone if the police showed up.

arrive. kg. testified while allowing plaintiff to use her car in the past, he

he always had express permission, and on this occasion she specifically told him not to take it

your car. The complainant admitted that he refused to give K.G. at her request

and also admitted under cross-examination that he had taken both cell phones. based on

Testimony of the two women The plaintiff threatened to kill everyone if the police came.

The jury could reasonably conclude that he had taken the cell phones with the intent to confiscate them.

DD and K.G. their mobile phones to prevent them from calling the police. Further,

As already mentioned, the defense attorney told the jury in closing arguments that it was their duty

Condemn the complainants of petty theft of telephones and major theft of automobiles. We find

the sentence that condemns the plaintiff for the crimes of aggravated robbery, aggravated theft of the motor vehicle,

and two counts of petty theft of the phones were supported by sufficient evidence, and

he was not against the apparent weight of the evidence.

{¶27} The complainant then argues that the jury erred in finding him not guilty of certain things.

Get paid while others owe. Argue whether the victims should not be believed

could not be the most serious crimes such as rape, kidnapping and serious robbery

with respect to the remaining fees charged.

{¶28} are entries with more than one count

they are not interdependent, and inconsistency in a trial does not result from inconsistent responses to different charges, only from inconsistent responses to them

Estado v. Lovejoy, 79 Ohio St.3d 440, 683 N.E.2d 1112 (1997), Absatz eins

of the curriculum. This court has previously issued a contradictory judgment that may result

Tolerance and compromise on the part of the jury, rather than a result of jury confusion. state

Fraley, 5. Dist. perry no. 03CA12, 2004-Ohio-4898, ¶ 15, zitiert United States v. Powell,

469 US 57, 105 S.Ct. 471, 83 L.Ed.2d 461 (1984).

{¶29} Furthermore, the jury is free to believe all, some, or none of the witnesses

Transcription. Strader Estate, District 5. Stark No. 2021CA00152, 2022-Ohio-4470, § 77. In

In the present case, the jury would have accepted the testimony of K.G. and DD about

the charges of your consent to have sexual intercourse with the applicant in connection with the allegations of rape and

his will and could not brush aside the kidnapping accusations.

{¶30} Appellant argues that the jury was at a loss to believe that D.D. and K.G. were afraid

during the meeting, for which reason his conviction for aggravated threats prevented him from

the apparent weight of evidence. Serious threat is defined by R.C. 2903.21:

(A) No one shall knowingly lead another to believe that the

(Video) 9 Different Ways to Win Your Appeal-The Appeals Process From A to Z by Appeals Lawyer Patrick Megaro

The offender causes serious bodily injury to the person or property of the

another person, the other person's unborn child, or a member of the other person

immediate family. In addition to any other basis for the other person's beliefs

the perpetrator causing serious bodily injury to person or property

the other person, the other person's unborn child, or a member of the other person's immediate family, the other person's belief may be based on words

or behavior by the perpetrator that targets or identifies a company,

Association or other organization that employs or is employed by the other person

the other is included.

{¶31} Both K.G. and DD witnessed the complainant swing his gun, aim the

Weapon in K.G. more than once and threatened to kill anyone if the police showed up multiple times

arrived at the crime scene. kg. The applicant who testified had never drawn a weapon in the past

before her, and both she and D.D. they were afraid. DD testified after being Macedonian,

The applicant placed him in a headlock, still brandishing the weapon. DD testified that he was afraid

for his life Again, in the closing argument, we note that the complainant's attorney agreed with the complainant

the applicant's conviction for serious threats was supported by sufficient evidence, and

he was not against the apparent weight of the evidence.

{¶32} The applicant was also convicted of criminal damage or endangerment, in

Violation of the R.C. 2909.06:

(A) No person shall cause or create a significant physical hazard

Damage to the property of another person without the consent of the other person:

(1) Knowingly, in any case[.] {¶33} The complainant argues that he did not knowingly break the televisions since he was inside

Pain and discomfort from becoming a Macedonian and losing control of your ability to know



(B) A person acts knowingly, regardless of purpose, when the person

is aware that the person's behavior is likely to lead to a specific outcome or

It's probably of a certain nature. A person is aware of the circumstances.

when the person knows that such circumstances are likely to exist. Yeah

Knowledge of the existence of a specific fact is an element of the offence,

such knowledge is established when a person subjectively believes that it is

has a high probability of its existence and does not research or trade with a

conscious goal of avoiding learning the fact.

{¶35} The applicant did not testify in court that he did not know what he was doing and when

He broke the televisions. Rather, the applicant testified that he was angry and angry. He

he later apologized to the women for taking the car and breaking their televisions. Us

televisions, and the verdict is not against the apparent weight of the evidence. {¶36} The error assignment will be overwritten. The Stark County Trial

The Court of Common Pleas confirmed.

(Video) Mellinger 30338 032823

From: Hoffman, P.J. Wise, J. and Delaney, J. agree


1. Federal appeals court rules domestic gun violence gun law unconstitutional
(FOX 4 Dallas-Fort Worth)
2. State of Ohio v. David Hackett, Case no. 2019-0601 | Supreme Court of Ohio April 29, 2020
(The Ohio Channel)
3. 4-11-22 Oral Argument
(1st District Court of Appeals Ham Co Ohio)
4. Terry v. Ohio Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained
5. Appeal of Civil Trial
(The Business Professor)
6. Understanding the The Appeals Process - Appealing Court Criminal Decisions in Ohio Criminal Courts
(Fortress Law Group)
Top Articles
Latest Posts
Article information

Author: Foster Heidenreich CPA

Last Updated: 06/15/2023

Views: 5731

Rating: 4.6 / 5 (76 voted)

Reviews: 91% of readers found this page helpful

Author information

Name: Foster Heidenreich CPA

Birthday: 1995-01-14

Address: 55021 Usha Garden, North Larisa, DE 19209

Phone: +6812240846623

Job: Corporate Healthcare Strategist

Hobby: Singing, Listening to music, Rafting, LARPing, Gardening, Quilting, Rappelling

Introduction: My name is Foster Heidenreich CPA, I am a delightful, quaint, glorious, quaint, faithful, enchanting, fine person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.