Login | May 12, 2025
Court upholds conviction of convenience store thief who wanted cab fare
ANNIE YAMSON
Special to the Legal News
Published: December 23, 2013
In the 6th District Court of Appeals, a three-judge appellate panel recently ruled that a robbery suspect was properly convicted in the Huron County Court of Common Pleas.
The defendant, Billy Craft, appealed the judgment of the Huron County court, arguing that his conviction was against the manifest weight of the evidence.
The appellate court found no merit to his arguments.
The case stemmed from a robbery that occurred on Dec. 8, 2011 at the Mickey Mart convenience store in Norwalk, Ohio.
According to case summary, around 9:30 p.m. a masked man entered the store armed with a small knife and ordered the clerk, Lavanna Harmon, to empty the cash register.
Harmon complied and handed over approximately $200 in cash. The exchange was captured on the store’s security cameras and microphones.
Harmon’s coworker, Cassie Williams, called the police after the robber fled the scene.
Det. James Fulton questioned the employees and then proceeded to review the audio and video footage with them.
The court’s summary stated that Harmon and Williams identified Craft as the speaker in the audio recordings “without hesitation.”
They stated that they recognized his voice from prior visits he made to the Mickey Mart and Williams said she had an extended conversation with Craft at a party they had both attended.
“Interestingly, at that party, Craft asked Williams what she would do if somebody robbed the Mickey Mart,” the summary stated.
Another store clerk, Jaime Robinson, was also asked to review the footage. She also identified Craft as the robber, stating that she recognized his voice from his visits to the store.
On one occasion, Robinson informed the police that Craft had informed her that Mickey Mart was going to be robbed and warned her not to “be a hero.”
Craft, who was homeless, was known to occasionally stay with his half-sister, Stephanie Bissell, and her husband Ralph.
Fulton questioned the Bissells, who initially tried to cover for Craft by stating that he had eaten dinner with them early in the evening but they did not know where he went afterwards.
The next day, the Bissells’ 11-year-old daughter told her school teacher that Craft had said he robbed the Mickey Mart in order to get money to pay for a taxi ride to see his girlfriend.
When Fulton returned to question them, the Bissells admitted that Craft had shown up at their home around 10 p.m. on the night of the robbery with cash in hand. They proceeded to confirm that the voice on the recording belonged to Craft.
A jury found Craft guilty of aggravated robbery and robbery. The charges were merged and he was sentenced to eight years in prison. Upon appeal, Craft challenged the manifest weight of the evidence.
“While he acknowledges that a robbery occurred at Mickey Mart on the night in question, Craft contends that the evidence does not support a finding that he was the perpetrator of the crime,” wrote Judge Stephen Yarbrough for the court of appeals.
Judge Yarbrough noted that Craft’s voice was identified by five different individuals, all of whom personally knew him.
Additionally, Ralph Bissell testified that the clothing worn by the robber in the video footage matched what Craft was wearing that same evening.
“Third, Craft had previously discussed robbing Mickey Mart with both Robinson and Williams, and the Bissells each testified that they also heard Craft speaking about a future robbery at Mickey Mart,” wrote Judge Yarbrough, noting that the Bissells’ child was the fifth person who overheard Craft speaking about his crime.
Craft argued that the description of his voice provided by Williams and Robinson did not match the robber’s voice heard in the audio recording.
Williams and Robinson each described Craft’s voice during their testimony as “part hillbilly and part ghetto.”
On the other hand, Craft stated that the robber spoke “normal English, with perhaps a trace of a southern or possibly Appalachian accent.”
The appellate panel found his argument to be irrelevant when it held that, even if the witnesses used the wrong descriptive terms to describe the voice they heard, “the fact remains that they each stated that they were familiar with Craft’s voice and that it matched the voice in the audio recording.”
The appellate panel concluded that Craft’s manifest weight argument was without merit in light of the “abundant evidence in the record to support the jury’s determination that Craft committed the robbery.”
Judges Thomas Osowik and James Jenson concurred.
The case is cited State v. Craft, 2013-Ohio-5352.
Copyright © 2013 The Daily Reporter - All Rights Reserved