State v. Shabazz ( 2011 )

[Cite as State v. Shabazz, 2011-Ohio-4631.]
Court of Appeals of Ohio
EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA
JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION
No. 95021
STATE OF OHIO
PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE
vs.
KAREEM SHABAZZ
DEFENDANT-APPELLANT
JUDGMENT:
APPLICATION DENIED
Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court
Case No. CR-532608
Application for Reopening
Motion No. 446745
RELEASE DATE: September 14, 2011
FOR APPELLANT
Kareem Shabazz, Pro Se
Inmate No. 590-579
Toledo Correctional Institution
2001 E. Central Avenue
Toledo, OH 43608
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
William D. Mason
Cuyahoga County Prosecutor
BY: T. Allan Regas
Assistant County Prosecutor
The Justice Center
1200 Ontario Street, 8th Floor
Cleveland, OH 44113
MELODY J. STEWART, P.J.:
{¶ 1} On August 9, 2011, the applicant, Kareem Shabazz, pursuant to App.R. 26(B),
applied to reopen this court’s judgment in State v. Kareem Shabazz, 8th Dist. No. 95021, in
which this court affirmed Shabazz’s convictions for receiving stolen property and having a
weapon under disability. Shabazz argues that his appellate counsel was ineffective for failing
to argue that his conviction for having a weapon under disability was obtained on insufficient
evidence. For the following reason, this court denies the application to reopen.
{¶ 2} The Grand Jury indicted Shabazz and a codefendant, David Merritt, on various
counts arising from a burglary of a home in Maple Heights, Ohio and a robbery of a Dollar
General store in the same city; both events occurred on April 21, 2009. The indictments
against Shabazz included a count of receiving stolen property from the burglary and having a
weapon under disability from the robbery. Shabazz elected to have the trial judge try the
weapon charge and a jury the other charges.
{¶ 3} The evidence at trial showed that various items, including rare coins, were stolen
from the home. On April 22, 2009, Shabazz tried to sell some of the rare coins to the Bedford
Jewelry and Coin store. Because the owner of the coins had told the shop owner of the
burglary, the shop owner was able to alert the police who came and arrested Shabazz. A
subsequent inventory search of Shabazz’s car revealed other items that had been stolen from
the home.
{¶ 4} Merritt agreed to testify against Shabazz in exchange for a total prison sentence
of 18 months. He testified that Shabazz had enlisted his help to rob a store and that Shabazz
gave him a shotgun which they used during the robbery of the Dollar General store.
{¶ 5} The jury found Shabazz guilty of one count of receiving stolen property and
found him not guilty of all other charges. The judge found him guilty of having a weapon
under disability.
{¶ 6} On appeal, Shabazz argued speedy trial and manifest weight of the evidence
errors. This court rejected both arguments. On the weapons charge, this court reasoned as
follows: “As it relates to Shabazz’s conviction for having weapons while under disability,
regardless of whether Merritt’s overall testimony was suspicious, the trial court at least believed
Merritt’s testimony that Shabazz had a shotgun and gave it to him to use in the robbery. ***
(Citation omitted.) This possession by Shabazz is enough to convict him of having a weapon
while under disability.” ¶51.
{¶ 7} This ruling answers Shabazz’s contention that there was insufficient evidence.
Generally, “a finding that a conviction was supported by the manifest weight of the evidence
necessarily includes a finding of sufficiency.” State v. Peterson, 8th Dist. No. 88248,
2007-Ohio-5712, ¶19; State v. Thompson, 78 Ohio St.3d 380, 388, 1997-Ohio-52, 678 N.E.2d
541; and State v. Krzywkowski, 8th Dist. No. 80392, 2002-Ohio-4438, reopening disallowed,
2003-Ohio-3209, ¶16. Therefore, this court has already ruled that there was sufficient
evidence to convict Shabazz on the weapon under disability charge, and his appellate counsel
was not ineffective for not raising the issue.
{¶ 8} Accordingly, this court denies the application to reopen.
MELODY J. STEWART, PRESIDING JUDGE
KENNETH A. ROCCO, J., and
KATHLEEN ANN KEOUGH, J., CONCUR