The Akron Legal News

Appeal denied for man who murdered, robbed former drug dealer

ANNIE YAMSON
Special to the Legal News
Published: April 14, 2016

A Dayton man who was convicted of murder, felonious assault, aggravated robbery and aggravated burglary recently lost his appeal in the 2nd District Court of Appeals.

Mitchell Gray is currently serving a 36-year-to-life prison sentence for the murder of Robert Munday, a former drug dealer and father of three.

Gray was convicted after a jury trial in the Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas.

Appealing from that judgment, Gray argued that the evidence did not amount to enough to sustain his convictions and prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt but the panel of three judges that considered his case found otherwise.

“We conclude that Gray’s convictions are supported by sufficient evidence and are not against the manifest weight of the evidence,” Judge Jeffrey Welbaum wrote in the opinion he authored on behalf of the court of appeals.

According to court documents, Gray conspired with a woman named Linda Kay to rob Munday of his drug money.

In the early morning hours of May 21, 2012, Munday’s neighbors reported hearing yelling and a volley of gunfire coming from his house. Munday suffered a fatal wound to the head along with a bullet to the hip.

Gray was also shot during the robbery and he left a trail of blood from the house and down the driveway.

The blood was used to connect him to the murder but witnesses also saw him leaving the home and limping down the drive with a gun.

During the investigation into Munday’s death, almost $6,000 was found to be missing from his home.

That money was taken by Kay, who fled to Indiana, disposed of the car in a river and checked into a Red Roof Inn with her girlfriend where she cut her hair in order to try and change her appearance.

Less than two days after the murder, however, Kay returned to her apartment complex where police were waiting for her.

“The crux of Gray’s argument (on appeal) is that a reasonable juror could not conclude beyond a reasonable doubt whether Kay or Gray committed the crimes and that no evidence was presented to show that Gray aided and abetted Kay in the commission of the offenses,” Welbaum wrote. “In this regard, Gray focuses on the fact that Kay was the one who had a motive to commit crimes and gained financially, while Gray was simply shot in the leg.”

The appellate panel held that Kay’s spending spree after the murder did not mean that Gray was not involved.

It noted that Gray had to seek medical treatment (he ended up in an emergency room) and had no opportunity to spend money. He was also arrested on the day of the crime.

“Furthermore, the state was not required to prove Gray’s motive for shooting Munday,” Welbaum wrote.

Gray’s murder conviction was predicated on the theory that Munday’s death was the result of a felonious assault, therefore, the state was only required to prove that Gray knowingly attempted to cause physical harm with a deadly weapon.

With regard to the robbery and burglary counts, the court of appeals held that Gray did not have to be the principal offender in order to be convicted.

He was merely required to aid and abet Kay, which he did by displaying a weapon while the both of them fled from the scene.

The appellate panel ruled that the jury was free to believe any of the evidence presented to it and it let the guilty verdicts stand.

The case was remanded for the correction of a clerical error in the sentencing entry but otherwise, the judgment of the Montgomery County court was affirmed.

Presiding Judge Mary Donovan and Judge Mike Fain concurred.

The case is cited State v. Gray, 2016-Ohio-1419.

[Back]