The Akron Legal News

Van driver who tried to run over woman in parking lot loses appeal

ANNIE YAMSON
Special to the Legal News
Published: November 30, 2015

A recent opinion released by the 8th District Court of Appeals found that a Cleveland man was properly found guilty and sentenced on a felonious assault charge after he knowingly and purposely tried to run over a woman in a Home Depot parking lot.

The opinion affirmed the conviction of Ronald Takacs, who was found guilty of the assault by a jury in the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas.

He was sentenced to 28 days in a local jail followed by 18 months of community control.

Case summary states that the victim, Christine Peters, testified at Takacs’ trial that, on Aug. 14, 2014, she was at the Home Depot in Cleveland Heights.

While waiting to turn left into a parking spot, Peters said she noticed a “bluish-green minivan type of car” approach and begin to pass her from her left side.

The driver of the van, later identified as Takacs, was disgruntled.

Peters said he “leaned over and yelled at me, flicked me off through passenger side window.”

Peter said she could not hear what Takacs was saying but that she could hear yelling.

After the van passed, it “sped down the lane” and turned left at the end of the parking area.

Peters proceeded to park her car and walk to the entrance of the store. As she was walking across the main entrance area, she saw the same van turn into the lane she was crossing.

Peters testified that the vehicle was aimed right at her when the driver began to accelerate at a rapid pace.

She said that he “was going faster and faster to the point where I had to run and jump out of the way to avoid being hit by his car” and that the driver was angry and yelling something at her through the window.

A witness, Lee Cozad, who was also walking toward the store’s entrance at the same time as Peters, corroborated her version of events.

Cozad told the jury that the driver of the van yelled “something derogatory” at Peters and that he heard the engine of the vehicle accelerate “almost like the driver took the accelerator pedal and just shoved it right down on the floor.”

Both Peters and Cozad took note of the van’s license plate and reported it to Christopher Britton, who was working store security detail at the time.

The record obtained from the vehicle registration led to Takacs, whom Peters identified as the man who tried to hit her with his car from a photograph.

No witnesses testified on behalf of the defense.

In his direct appeal to the 8th District court, Takacs claimed his conviction was against the sufficiency and manifest weight of the evidence.

According to him, surveillance video obtained from the Home Depot did not support the conclusion that he “used his car with the requisite mens rea” for felonious assault or that he used his car to cause physical harm.

In support of his argument, Takacs claimed the video demonstrated that he applied his brakes “throughout his interaction” with Peters, that he exercised complete control over his vehicle during the incident and that he did not direct his vehicle toward Peters.

“We disagree,” Judge Tim McCormack wrote in the opinion that he authored on behalf of the three-judge appellate panel. “When considering a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence, we review the evidence admitted at trial to determine ‘whether such evidence if believed, would convince the average mind of the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.’”

The court of appeals held that, without the video, the testimony of Peters and Cozad alone was sufficient to prove that Takacs knowingly caused or attempted to cause physical harm to Peters with his vehicle.

“Takacs appeared very angry and directed that anger toward Peters,” McCormack wrote. “Both Cozad and Peters testified that Takacs aimed his car at Peters and accelerated. Peters would likely have been hit had she not jumped out of the way of Takacs’ fast-moving van.”

The appellate panel held that the essential elements of felonious assault were proven at trial.

It then considered Takacs’ manifest weight of the evidence argument, in support of which he also cited the surveillance video, arguing that the evidence failed to show that he acted knowingly.

“We find that the video does not contradict the evidence,” McCormack wrote. “In fact, it supports it.”

The video showed Takacs moving directly into Peters’ path at an apparent high rate of speed, making no effort to avoid Peters.

“In fact, it appears from the video that the front end of the van veers slightly toward Peters just as the van reaches her,” McCormack wrote.

The court of appeals concluded that the evidence supported the mens rea for felonious assault and overruled both of Takacs’ assignments of error.

The judgment of the Cuyahoga County court was affirmed with Presiding Judge Eileen A. Gallagher and Judge Anita Laster Mays joining McCormack to form the majority.

The case is cited State v. Takacs, 2015-Ohio-4585.

[Back]