The Akron Legal News

Man loses appeal of his murder, robbery convictions

ANNE YAMSON
Special to the Legal News
Published: March 10, 2014

A murder conviction was upheld this week when the 1st District Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment of the Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas.

The Hamilton County court found Deron Howard guilty of aggravated murder, attempted murder and two counts of aggravated robbery for the July 7, 2007 shooting of Michael Tucker and Charles McCray.

All of the charges contained firearm specifications.

According to the factual background of the case provided in the court of appeals’ opinion, Tucker, McCray, Sarah Greisinger and Kara Bowen were together and driving to a home so McCray could change out of his work clothes before they all headed to the movies.

The women got out of the car and walked toward the house when at least two people confronted McCray and Tucker on the street. McCray told the women to run.

Tucker was hit in the head and lost consciousness.

When he awoke, he realized he had been shot in the back and he felt someone going through his pockets.

Once the attackers left, Tucker was able to crawl to the house to seek help.

McCray was shot in the torso and died from blood loss.

The attackers got away with an iPod, $30 in cash and a Nokia cell phone.

Police recovered hollow-point, .380-caliber bullet casings from the scene but no other physical evidence.

Tucker and the women could not identify any of the suspects.

With little evidence and no leads, the case remained unsolved until December 2010.

That month, Martinez Pope was facing charges for carrying a concealed weapon. He approached police with information regarding the 2007 shooting.

Pope told the police that, on the day of the murder, he was at Howard’s residence.

Howard left around 4 p.m. and returned between midnight and 1 a.m. with Devon “Buddha” Hill and Michael “Mike Muscle” Morton.

Howard announced that he had killed a man and shot another.

Based on that information, the police arranged a recorded phone call between Pope and Howard during which Howard discussed the night of the 2007 murder.

Howard stated that he had used hollow-point bullets and that he was involved in another shooting that same night in Price Hill.

In January 2011, Howard came to the police station for an interview.

Initially, he denied any knowledge of the murder but eventually realized that the police suspected his involvement.

He told the investigating detectives that he wanted a lawyer but also indicated that he wanted to be the first person to give police his side of the story.

Eventually, Howard admitted that he was involved in the murder and robbery along with Buddha and Mike Muscle.

He also said the three men had been in Price Hill earlier that night looking for people to rob when an unknown person opened fire on them.

The group left Price Hill and traveled to Bond Hill where they planned to rob someone else.

According to Howard, Buddha was carrying a High Point .380-caliber firearm and Mike Muscle had a .22 or .25-caliber gun.

Howard claimed that, during the robbery, Buddha panicked and began shooting.

Police discovered that, a few days after the murder, Buddha had been arrested while in possession of a .25-caliber weapon.

Howard maintained that he did not fire any shots and did not have a weapon but admitted that he got out of the car and searched the pockets of both victims.

Following his indictment, Howard waived his right to a jury trial but the state sought the death penalty so his case was tried to a three-judge panel.

The panel declined to impose the death penalty following its findings of guilt but instead ordered Howard to serve life in prison without the possibility of parole and an additional six-year term.

Upon appeal, Howard presented several assignments of error one of which argued that the trial court erred by failing to suppress his interview with police because Howard had made an unambiguous request for counsel during his interview, which the police ignored.

The appellate panel reviewed the police interview and found that Howard told the officers, “I would like to talk to a lawyer, I also want to talk to you, but like you say, I’m first. Always good to be first ... I guess I want an opportunity to be first.”

“Howard’s statements to police indicated that, although Howard wanted a lawyer, his opportunity to be the first to talk to the officers trumped his interest in having a lawyer present at that moment,” wrote Judge Patrick Fischer on behalf of the court of appeals. “Because Howard’s statements did not amount to a clear and unambiguous request for an attorney, the trial court did not err in overruling Howard’s motion to suppress his statements to police.”

Howard also claimed the trial court should not have permitted evidence of the Price Hill shoot-out to be introduced at trial because it was other-acts evidence.

Judge Fischer noted that Evid.R. 404(B) precludes the admission of evidence of an accused’s other bad acts when it is offered in order to show that the defendant “acted in conformity with that character.”

The evidence is admissible, however, if it is used to prove “motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity or absence of mistake or accident.”

“The evidence regarding Howard’s earlier shoot-out in Price Hill is relevant to show Howard’s plan and intent to use a firearm during the course of the (Bond Hill) robbery,” wrote Judge Fischer.

In his police interview, Howard stated that Buddha had panicked and just started shooting at Bond Hill.

“The evidence the Howard, Buddha and Mike Muscle had been involved in an earlier shoot-out that same night as they were driving around looking for people to rob tends to disprove Howard’s own version of events that the murder, attempted murder and aggravated robbery were the result of panic,” wrote Judge Fischer.

The appellate panel held that the Price Hill evidence was relevant and it proceeded to overrule Howard’s remaining arguments including claims that his convictions were against the sufficiency and manifest weight of the evidence.

The judgment of the Hamilton County court was affirmed with Presiding Judge Patrick Dinkelacker and Judge Patrick DeWine concurring.

The case is cited State v. Howard, 2014-Ohio-655.

[Back]