State v. Smith , 2013 Ohio 2627 ( 2013 )


Menu:
  • [Cite as State v. Smith, 
    2013-Ohio-2627
    .]
    IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO
    FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
    WASHINGTON COUNTY
    STATE OF OHIO,                 :
    :
    Plaintiff-Appellee,       : Case No. 12CA9
    :
    vs.                       :
    : DECISION AND JUDGMENT
    GERALD A. SMITH,               : ENTRY
    :
    Defendant-Appellant.       : Released: 06/07/13
    _____________________________________________________________
    APPEARANCES:
    George J. Cosenza, Parkersburg, West Virginia, for Appellant.
    James E. Schneider, Washington County Prosecutor, and Kevin A. Rings,
    Washington County Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, Marietta, Ohio, for
    Appellee.
    _____________________________________________________________
    McFarland, P.J.
    {¶1} Gerald A. Smith appeals his conviction in the Washington
    County Court of Common Pleas after a jury found him guilty of one count of
    aggravated murder, two counts of aggravated burglary, two counts of
    aggravated robbery, grand theft of a firearm, grand theft of a motor vehicle,
    grand theft from an elderly person, and tampering with evidence. On appeal,
    Smith contends that (1) he was denied effective assistance of counsel, and
    (2) the trial court erred by denying his Rule 29 motion to dismiss the charge
    of tampering with evidence. Upon review, we find Appellant was not
    Washington App. No. 12CA9                                                      2
    denied effective assistance of counsel. We further find the trial transcript
    contains evidence from which any rational trier of fact could have found the
    essential elements of tampering with evidence proven beyond a reasonable
    doubt. As such the trial court did not err in failing to grant the Crim.R.29
    motion to dismiss. Accordingly, we overrule both assignments of error and
    affirm the judgment of the trial court.
    FACTS
    {¶2} Homer Rogers, age 66, was murdered in his home on Burnett
    Road in Cutler, Ohio, apparently while he slept. On the morning of June 19,
    2010, he was found on a living room couch, covered by a blanket, with a
    knife wound to the right side of his neck. At the time of his death, Rogers’
    daughter Cynthia Lynn Rogers (hereinafter “Lynn”) and her children also
    resided in the home on Burnett Road. Lynn had been separated from her
    husband, Gerald Smith, Appellant herein, for several weeks. Appellant was
    living in the marital home on Kenny Road, approximately 2-3 miles from the
    Rogers’ home. Appellant and his wife had been married approximately 20
    years and had a violent history.
    {¶3} Soon after decedent’s body was discovered, Appellant became
    the prime suspect in the murder investigation. That same day, decedent’s
    red pickup truck was found in Athens County at the home of Allen Shane
    Washington App. No. 12CA9                                                       3
    Lucas, Appellant’s cousin and close friend. A knife with a reddish- brown
    substance which appeared to be blood on the blade was found in the center
    console of the red truck. Also on June 19th, Athens County 911 received a
    phone call from Shane Lucas saying Appellant was with him at Strouds Run
    State Park in Athens County, and Appellant had confessed to killing Homer
    Rogers. Later, on June 19th, Appellant was tased and apprehended at
    Stroud’s Run State Park.
    {¶4} Appellant was indicted in July 2010 for the aggravated murder
    of Homer Rogers; two counts of aggravated burglary; two counts of
    aggravated robbery; grand theft of a firearm; grand theft of a motor vehicle;
    grand theft from an elderly person, and tampering with evidence. Appellant
    entered pleas of not guilty by reason of insanity. In September 2010,
    Appellant was found not competent to stand trial, not capable of
    understanding the nature and severity of charges against him, and not
    capable of assisting his attorney due to his severe mental illness. In March
    2011, Appellant was found competent to stand trial. In a status report
    regarding competency restoration pursuant to R.C. 2945.38(F), Dr. Dennish
    M. Eshbaugh, PhD, noted hospital records revealed Appellant had been
    considered to be malingering symptoms of mental illness and memory
    deficits. Appellant proceeded to trial on November 28, 2011.
    Washington App. No. 12CA9                                                       4
    {¶5} At trial, the State’s first witness was Lynn Rogers. She testified
    on June 18, 2010, her son Cody Smith informed her Appellant was calling
    her father’s house repeatedly. Cody said “Pap” [Homer Rogers] was getting
    upset and was going to call the law and have Appellant arrested if the calls
    didn’t stop. Ms. Rogers testified she then called Appellant, sometime
    between 11:30 and 12:00 p.m., and told him to stop calling. During the
    course of that conversation, Lynn said to Appellant: “I’m not coming home.
    I’m done. I did it for 20 years. Our kids are grown and they can take care of
    themselves.” Appellant then asked her where she was and who she was
    with. Lynn testified she responded to the effect it was “none of his fucking
    business where I was at and it wasn’t none of his business who I was with.”
    She then hung up the phone. Lynn stayed with a friend, Wayne McClain,
    that evening and did not return to her father’s house until 7:30 a.m. on June
    19th. Her father’s red pickup truck was not there.
    {¶6} Lynn Rogers also testified when she returned home, she took a
    shower and proceeded to prepare a Father’s Day dinner for her father. Her
    father appeared to be asleep on the living room couch. Cody Smith was
    sleeping on a loveseat in the same room. Jessica Trus, Lynn’s
    granddaughter, was sleeping on the floor in front of the television. Lynn
    also noticed her dog Bubba was in the house. She was surprised to see the
    Washington App. No. 12CA9                                                       5
    dog because she had not seen him since she left her husband in April. Lynn
    and Jessica proceeded to take the dog back to Appellant’s trailer, but
    dropped him off some distance from the trailer so Appellant would not see
    her. When she passed the trailer, she noticed her father’s car trailer sitting in
    the driveway.
    {¶7} Lynn and Jessica returned home. Lynn began working in the
    kitchen when her daughter Tana Rogers told her to “go check on Pap.”
    When Lynn spoke to him and touched his foot, her father did not move and
    he was not breathing. Lynn testified she pulled his blanket down and blood
    was everywhere. She called 911 around 9:30 a.m.
    {¶8} At trial, Lynn also described her “rocky” marriage to Appellant.
    She testified she stayed with him for the sake of the children and “so he
    wouldn’t kill my dad.” She testified he consumed alcohol heavily over the
    years. Lynn further testified to damaging statements allegedly made by
    Appellant. These statements describing threats and abuse were not
    provided in discovery nor objected to at trial. Essentially, Rogers testified
    during the course of their approximately 20 years of marriage, Appellant on
    various occasions shot at her; kicked, punched, bit, and slapped her; knocked
    her to the ground; and pulled her by her hair. She testified the abuse began
    in 1989. She further testified she left Appellant approximately 15 times over
    Washington App. No. 12CA9                                                         6
    the years, but always returned because he threatened her or her family. She
    testified he said “Somebody in your family’s going to fucking die.” During
    her testimony, Lynn Rogers identified State’s Exhibit B, a single knife;
    State’s Exhibit C, a 22 revolver her father kept on the living room wall; and
    State’s Exhibit D, two additional knives. Lynn Rogers testified Appellant
    and she bought the three knives in Athens County three months prior.
    {¶9} Kimberly Schaefer, Homer Rogers’ other daughter, also
    testified at trial. Ms. Schaefer and her family lived next door to the decedent.
    She testified at the time of his death, her father owned a red 2005 GMC
    Sierra pickup truck. The truck was also equipped with a topper, brush
    guard, and a trailer hitch. A car trailer was attached to the truck. Her father
    had been at her house on the night of June 18, 2010, until approximately
    11:30 p.m. When he left and walked home, his truck and trailer were in his
    yard. When she awoke around 7:15 a.m. the next morning, she noticed her
    father’s red pickup truck was gone. During her testimony, Ms. Schaefer
    also identified her father’s 22 revolver.
    {¶10} The State also presented testimony from Robert Shott, a
    forensic pathologist with the Montgomery County Coroner’s Office. Dr.
    Shott performed the autopsy of Homer Roger’s body and determined that the
    cause of death was a single sharp-force injury to the neck. He described a
    Washington App. No. 12CA9                                                       7
    stab wound on the right side of the decedent’s neck, approximately one-half
    inch. He testified the wound severed the spinal cord at the C-1 and C2
    levels, which in effect, lead to instant and complete paralysis of the body
    below the neck. In Dr. Shott’s opinion, the stab wound was likely caused by
    a single-edged knife, with only one sharpened side. Dr. Shott opined that
    State’s Exhibit B, a box containing a single-edged knife, was consistent with
    the type of weapon that could have caused the wound on Homer Rogers.
    Dr. Shott also opined that for the injury to get through the decedent’s skin,
    muscle, and bones, it would have taken a significant amount of force. Dr.
    Shott testified that there was no evidence of injuries on the decedent’s hands
    or forearms, or any defensive- type wounds which would indicate a struggle
    or fight with another person.
    {¶11} The next State’s witness was Bryan White with the Ohio
    Bureau of Criminal Investigation (BCI). He investigated decedent’s red
    truck at the Sheriff’s Office. A wooden-handled knife with a five-inch blade
    was found in the center console of the truck. It had a reddish- brown
    substance that was later positively identified to be blood. The knife was
    photographed, packaged, and submitted to BCI for further examination. Mr.
    White identified the knife as State’s Exhibit B.
    Washington App. No. 12CA9                                                         8
    {¶12} Tim Jenkins also testified on behalf of the State. Mr. Jenkins is
    a distant relative of Appellant. He testified to seeing Appellant at a party in
    Chesterhill, Ohio (Morgan County) around 12:30 or 1:00 a.m. on June 19th.
    Mr. Jenkins saw Appellant drive up in a Ford diesel truck with a brush
    guard. Mr. Jenkins testified Appellant appeared to have been drinking. He
    was able to walk across a flat area 50-75 feet to get to Jenkins. He testified
    Appellant did not appear so impaired that he could not drive.
    {¶13} Scott Parks, a detective with the Washington County Sheriff’s
    Office also testified he was at the Rogers’ home to assist with the
    investigation. He was assigned to stand by the crime scene and coordinate
    with BCI agents. He arrived at approximately 11:25 a.m. Detective Parks
    testified although there was a bit of blood spatter on the wall, there were no
    signs of struggle in the house.
    {¶14} The State presented testimony from Emily Draper, a forensic
    scientist with Ohio BCI. She performed DNA testing on samples obtained
    from Gerald Smith and Homer Rogers. Ms. Draper testified she gave her
    computer printout as to the DNA samples tested to Raymond Peoples,
    another forensic scientist with Ohio BCI.
    {¶15} Raymond Peoples next testified when the evidence samples
    first arrived at BCI, Peter Tassi, Jr., a forensic biologist, examined them and
    Washington App. No. 12CA9                                                                             9
    prepared a report. 1 Mr. Peoples obtained the Tassi report and the computer
    printout from Ms. Draper for review. At that point, Mr. Peoples performed
    DNA testing on two samples, one from the blade of the knife and one from
    the handle of the knife. He testified the DNA profile from the blade of the
    knife was a mixture. The major profile in the mixture was consistent with
    Homer Rogers’ DNA; the minor profile was consistent with Gerald Smith’s
    DNA. The DNA profile from the handle of the knife was consistent with
    Gerald Smith’s DNA sample.
    {¶16} The jury also heard testimony from Allen “Shane” Lucas,
    Appellant’s first cousin. Shane Lucas testified he was aware that Appellant
    had marital problems. As a result, Appellant had stayed overnight at the
    Lucas home in Athens County in the past.
    {¶17} Shane Lucas further testified on June 19, 2010, Appellant
    showed up at the Lucas home around 4:30 -5:00 a.m. Appellant wanted to
    get beer. He indicated a friend had dropped him off. Shane Lucas could see
    Appellant had already been consuming and he described Appellant as
    “pretty tanked.” Shane Lucas recalled Appellant had recently been in a
    motorcycle accident and had injured his ribs and one leg. Appellant was
    walking with a limp.
    1
    Peter Tassi, Jr. was subpoenaed for trial. On the day he was to testify, he was excused because of
    personal illness. Counsel stipulated to admission of his report.
    Washington App. No. 12CA9                                                 10
    {¶18} Around 5:30 a.m., Shane Lucas and Appellant bought three 6-
    packs of beer and drank it at the Lucas house. The Lucas family had planned
    to go boating that day at Stroud’s Run State Park. When the Lucases left to
    go boating before noon, Appellant went with them. While out on water,
    Shane Lucas’s cousin, Bo Lucas of Chillicothe, called. Cheryl Lucas,
    Shane’s wife, answered the phone. Bo Lucas informed her “Gerald killed
    Homer.” Cheryl then handed Shane the phone and Bo Lucas gave him the
    same information. Cheryl Lucas hung up the phone. During this time,
    Appellant had been passed out on the front of the boat. Cheryl Lucas woke
    up Appellant and asked him “Gerald, did you kill Homer?”
    {¶19} Then, according to Shane Lucas’s testimony, Appellant
    confessed to stabbing Homer Rogers. Appellant told them that Lynn had
    called Appellant and wanted him to come to her father’s house. He went to
    the home, where Homer Rogers was waiting for him with a gun. Appellant
    told the Lucases they fought over the gun. Appellant admitted either hitting
    or stabbing Mr. Rogers with something. He then told the Lucases he
    “picked him up, put him on the couch, and covered him up.” Shane Lucas
    testified Appellant was crying when he confessed.
    {¶20} At this point, Shane Lucas took his boat to shore. Shane
    Lucas and Appellant got off the boat. Shane Lucas took Appellant to the
    Washington App. No. 12CA9                                                    11
    Stroud’s Run campground. At this point he noticed Appellant had a
    revolver. Mr. Lucas then called Athens 911 and advised the dispatcher that
    Appellant killed Homer Rogers. Shane Lucas specifically told police
    Appellant admitted stabbing or hitting Rogers in the neck.
    {¶21} Shane Lucas also testified he later learned Appellant had
    driven decedent’s red pickup truck and parked it on his property. Appellant’s
    driveway is 60 yards or longer, from Salem Road. His house is located at
    the top of the driveway. Beyond the Lucas house is a field. Decedent’s
    truck was parked over a trash pile, about 30 feet from the house. Shane
    Lucas testified Appellant had driven the decedent’s truck before but would
    park in the general area of the house, not up into the woods.
    {¶22} The next State’s witness was Detective Mark Johnson from the
    Washington County Sheriff’s Office. Detective Johnson testified that when
    he walked through the Rogers’ house, he saw no signs of struggle. There
    were no signs of gunshot holes or a gun being fired. Detective Johnson
    identified State’s Exhibit H-1, a photograph of the decedent’s 22 revolver
    with six rounds. He testified this was the gun Appellant had in his
    possession before he was taken into custody.
    {¶23} Detective Johnson further testified Chief Deputy Mark Warden
    (hereinafter “Warden”) and he drove to the Lucas residence. The Lucas
    Washington App. No. 12CA9                                                    12
    residence is nearly 100 yards off Salem Road. When they arrived, they
    found the decedent’s red truck driven up over a trash pile and down into a
    brushy wooded area. Detective Johnson testified the truck was parked 30-40
    yards from Shane Lucas’s residence and he did not think it could be seen
    from Salem Road. Detective Johnson did not see the truck until it was
    pointed out to him. Detective Johnson drove the truck off the trash pile and
    down to a flat spot so a tow truck driver could transport it to the Washington
    County Sheriff’s Office. He identified State’s Exhibits H-2 and H-3,
    photographs of the truck and where it was found. These photographs
    demonstrate the pickup truck was partially hidden from view.
    {¶24} While inside the truck, Detective Johnson saw the knife that
    was found in the center console. Detective Johnson testified he later
    obtained pictures of the knife from BCI. He showed the photographs to
    Lynn Rogers. She identified the knife in the photographs as being the knife
    Appellant and she had previously purchased. A week or so later, Lynn took
    Detective Johnson to Appellant’s trailer and showed him the other two
    knives.
    {¶25} The State’s final witness was Chief Deputy Mark Warden.
    Warden testified when he responded to the Rogers’ residence, he took
    control of the crime scene. He met with the first responding officer and
    Washington App. No. 12CA9                                                   13
    obtained the initial information. Warden called out other officers for
    assistance and walked through the house. Warden also learned that Cody
    Smith’s whereabouts were unaccounted for and the family present at the
    scene suspected Appellant. Warden sent two deputies to Appellant’s
    residence, looking for Cody. The deputies advised that decedent’s car trailer
    was at Appellant’s residence. Those deputies were then advised to secure
    Appellant’s residence as a crime scene. Eventually, Warden and Detective
    Johnson proceeded to the Lucas residence. While en route, the two received
    a phone call from Athens County 911 informing they had received a phone
    call from Shane Lucas. Shane Lucas had advised 911 that Appellant was
    with him at Stroud’s Run State Park, and Appellant had confessed to killing
    Homer Rogers.
    {¶26} Warden testified when they arrived at Stroud’s Run, they were
    informed Appellant had a handgun. They were further advised Appellant
    had told Shane Lucas he was going to “go out by police,” i.e. “suicide by
    cop.” The two first interviewed Shane Lucas. Mr. Lucas gave them
    precise information, that Appellant had fought with Homer Rogers and
    stabbed him.
    {¶27} At Strouds Run, Appellant was sleeping on a park bench. A 22
    revolver with six live rounds was under his head. Before Warden and
    Washington App. No. 12CA9                                                                               14
    Detective Johnson could speak to him, Appellant was tased and taken into
    custody by Athens law enforcement officials. The weapon was secured.
    Detective Johnson Mirandized Appellant and started to interview him.
    Shortly into the interview, Appellant indicated he wanted to talk to Mark
    Warden. Warden walked over, asked him if he understood his Miranda
    rights, and began questioning him. The entire interview with Detective
    Johnson and Chief Deputy Warden was recorded. The interview is
    rambling, but Appellant reiterated:
    1) he did not know where he was at, or where he had been the
    previous night;
    2) he did not know what they were talking about when they
    asked him about a gun;
    3) he did not remember being at [Rogers’] house;
    4) he did not know what happened at [Rogers’]house;
    5) he did not know what happened to [Rogers];
    6) he did not know how he got to Athens or Shane [Lucas’s]
    house;
    7) he “did not do it”;
    8) he loved his wife; and,
    9) he walked in on [Rogers] raping his wife [Cynthia Lynn
    Rogers].2
    2
    On the tape, Appellant states than two years into their marriage, he walked inside his house to find Homer
    Rogers raping his daughter Lynn. Appellant stated his wife was always “messed up” in the head and that’s
    Washington App. No. 12CA9                                                                                15
    {¶28} Despite repeated inability to remember specific happenings,
    when questioned about what took place inside the Rogers’ house on the
    night of the murder, Appellant stated that “Homer tried to kill him,” and that
    [Homer] and his wife called him and got him to come to the house. Later in
    the interview, Appellant stated he was never there but hesitated, “I don’t
    think so.” Appellant also testified “I didn’t go over there to do nothing.”
    Appellant stated “I don’t think I killed him. I know I didn’t kill him.”
    {¶29} During the interview, Warden told Appellant that Shane Lucas
    saw him drive up. Appellant’s response was: “Did he see me? The red
    pickup truck might be there but I didn’t drive it.”
    {¶30} Also during the interview, Appellant stated also that his wife
    stood to inherit a large amount of money if her father died. He stated that
    over the years his wife had “begged” him to kill her father.
    {¶31} Warden testified when Appellant gave the statement, he did
    appear to be “hung over” or had just awakened. On the recorded statement,
    Appellant notices having urinated on himself at some point. Appellant told
    Warden he had done cocaine the night before. Appellant’s counsel neither
    filed a motion to suppress the statement nor objected to the playing of the
    statement at trial.
    why he stayed with her “all those years. “ Lynn Rogers denied this allegation in direct testimony and cross-
    examination.
    Washington App. No. 12CA9                                                                         16
    {¶32} The defense presented only one witness, Lorena Smith,
    Appellant’s daughter.3 Ms. Smith testified she had an “o.k.” childhood, and
    was “daddy’s girl.” She testified, over the years, Appellant would do drugs
    at Thanksgiving and Christmas.
    {¶33} Ms. Smith testified Appellant was in a motorcycle crash on
    May 30, 2010, and broke six ribs and his leg. While in the hospital,
    Appellant was prescribed Percocet and Vicodin. He came to her house when
    he was released. He did not walk very well. Appellant was bipolar and had
    severe depression. Ms. Smith testified Appellant was drinking alcohol a lot
    when he lived with her.
    {¶34} Ms. Smith further testified on June 18, 2010, Appellant was
    “really drunk” and arguing with her. She told him to get out of her house,
    and she would get him the next day when he was sober. She estimated he
    drank 36 beers that day. When she dropped him off at his trailer at 7:30 or
    8:00 p.m., she left him with 72 more beers. Ms. Smith testified there were no
    vehicles at his trailer when she left him.
    {¶35} Ms. Smith also opined Appellant could not have walked 2-3
    miles in the country, given the intoxicated condition he was in and his
    physical injuries. She testified on cross-examination that if her father was at
    3
    Lorena Smith is Jessika Trus’s mother. Her husband is Adam Trus. However, at trial, Ms. Smith
    indicated she was separated from her husband.
    Washington App. No. 12CA9                                                    17
    the Rogers’ residence, she thought somebody helped him get there. She also
    admitted that days before she dropped him off at his home, he was
    threatening to kill Homer and Lynn. Ms. Smith testified the one thing
    Appellant wanted more than anything, was “his wife back,” and Homer
    Rogers was the “one obstacle.”
    {¶36} Ms. Smith further testified to an incident approximately one
    year prior to Homer Rogers’ death. Lynn and Appellant were having dinner
    at Ms. Smith’s house. Ms. Smith testified Lynn told her at that time, when
    her father passed away, she would inherit $600,000.00.
    {¶37} In closing, the defense argued in Appellant’s intoxicated
    condition and with his physical injuries, there was no way Appellant could
    have walked from his trailer to the Rogers’ residence. Defense counsel also
    argued Lynn had a new boyfriend and was “finished” with Appellant. She
    saw an opportunity to get rid of him and also inherit $600,000.00. She
    knew the kind of reaction she would trigger in Appellant when she called
    him, refused to tell him who she was with, and hung up the phone having
    said, “I’m through with you.” Counsel argued that no one investigated
    Lynn or Wayne McClain, and Lynn steered the investigation to Appellant
    the entire time.
    Washington App. No. 12CA9                                                                               18
    {¶38} Appellant was found guilty of all nine counts contained in the
    indictment. He was sentenced on January 27, 2012, to a total sentence of
    life without the option of parole and sixty additional months. 4 This timely
    appeal followed.
    ASSIGNMENTS OF ERROR
    I. THE APPELLANT, GERALD A. SMITH, WAS DENIED
    EFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL.
    II. THE COMMON PLEAS COURT FAILED TO GRANT
    THE DEFENDANT’S RULE 29 MOTION TO DISMISS THE
    CHARGE OF TAMPERING WITH EVIDENCE.
    ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR ONE
    {¶39} Appellant contends he was denied effective assistance of
    counsel due to (1) counsel’s failure to file a pretrial motion to suppress
    Appellant’s statement to Chief Deputy Mark Warden, (2) counsel’s failure to
    object to the statement’s admission into evidence, and (3) counsel’s failure
    to object to allegedly prejudicial statements attributed to defendant and
    testified to by his ex-wife.
    A. STANDARD OF REVIEW
    {¶40} Criminal defendants have a right to counsel, including a
    4
    Appellant was not sentenced on counts two, three, four, and seven of the indictment as they were
    considered to be allied offenses of similar import to count one, aggravated murder. As to count six, he was
    sentenced to thirty months to be served consecutively. As to count eight, he was sentenced to thirty months
    to be served consecutively. As to count nine, he was sentenced to thirty months to be served concurrently.
    Washington App. No. 12CA9                                                      19
    right to effective assistance of counsel. McMann v. Richardson, 
    397 U.S. 759
    , 790, 
    90 S. Ct. 1441
    ; State v. Stout, 4th Dist. No. 07CA5, 2008-Ohio-
    1366, 
    2008 WL 757521
    , ¶ 21. To establish constitutionally ineffective
    assistance of counsel, a defendant must show (1) that his counsel’s
    performance was deficient and (2) that the deficient performance deprived
    him of a fair trial. Strickland v. Washington, 
    466 U.S. 668
    , 687, 
    104 S. Ct. 2052
    ; State v. Issa, 
    93 Ohio St. 3d 49
    , 67, 
    752 N.E. 2d 904
     (2001); State v.
    Goff, 
    82 Ohio St. 3d 123
    , 139, 
    694 N.E. 2d 916
     (1998). “In order to show
    deficient performance, the defendant must prove that counsel’s performance
    fell below an objective level of reasonable representation. To show
    prejudice, the defendant must show a reasonable probability that, but for
    counsel’s errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different.”
    State v. Conway, 
    109 Ohio St.3d 412
    , 
    2006-Ohio-2815
    , 
    848 N.E.2d 810
    , ¶
    95 (citations omitted). “Failure to establish either element is fatal to the
    claim.” State v. Jones, 4th Dist. No. 06CA3116, 
    2008-Ohio-968
    , 
    2008 WL 613116
    , ¶ 14. Therefore, if one element is dispositive, a court need not
    analyze both. State v. Madrigal, 
    87 Ohio St.3d 378
    , 389, 
    721 N.E.2d 52
    (2000) (stating that a defendant’s failure to satisfy one of the elements
    “negates a court’s need to consider the other”).
    Washington App. No. 12CA9                                                       20
    {¶41} When considering whether trial counsel’s representation
    amounts to deficient performance, “a court must indulge a strong
    presumption that counsel’s conduct falls within the wide range of reasonable
    professional assistance.” Strickland, 466 U.S. at 689. Thus, “the defendant
    must overcome the presumption that, under the circumstances, the
    challenged action might be considered sound trial strategy.” Id. at 689. “A
    properly licensed attorney is presumed to execute his duties in an ethical and
    competent manner.” State v. Taylor, 4th Dist. No. 07CA11, 
    2008-Ohio-482
    ,
    
    2008 WL 343328
    , ¶ 10, citing State v. Smith, 
    17 Ohio St.3d 98
    , 100 
    477 N.E.2d 1128
     (1985). Therefore, a defendant bears the burden to show
    ineffectiveness by demonstrating that counsel’s error were so serious that he
    or she failed to function as the counsel guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment.
    State v. Gondor, 
    112 Ohio St. 3d 377
    , 
    2006-Ohio-6679
    , 
    860 N.E. 2d 77
    , ¶
    62; State v. Hamblin, 
    37 Ohio St.3d 153
    , 156, 
    524 N.E.2d 476
     (1988).
    {¶42} To establish prejudice, a defendant must demonstrate that a
    reasonable probability exists that but for counsel’s error, the result of the
    trial would have been different. State v. White, 
    82 Ohio St.3d 16
    , 23, 
    693 N.E.2d 772
     (1998); State v. Bradley, 
    42 Ohio St.3d 136
    , 
    538 N.E.2d 373
    (1989), at paragraph three of the syllabus. Furthermore, courts may not
    simply assume the existence of prejudice, but must require that prejudice be
    Washington App. No. 12CA9                                                     21
    affirmatively demonstrated. See State v. Clark, 4th Dist. No. 02CA684,
    
    2003-Ohio-1707
    , 
    2003 WL 1756101
    , ¶ 22; State v. Tucker, 4th Dist. No.
    01CA2592, 
    2002 WL 507529
     (Apr. 2, 2002); State v. Kuntz, 4th Dist. No.
    1691, 
    1992 WL 42774
     (Feb. 26, 1992).
    {¶43} A defendant must establish that counsel’s failure to file a
    motion to suppress would have a reasonable probability of success and
    caused him prejudice. Morrison, ¶10; State v. Robinson, 
    108 Ohio App.3d 428
    , 
    670 N.E.2d 1077
     (3rd Dist.1996).
    {¶44} Additionally, in Madrigal, 
    87 Ohio St. 3d 378
    , 
    721 N.E.2d 52
    ,
    the Ohio Supreme Court discussed the issue of the requirement of actual
    prejudice springing from the failure to file a motion to suppress evidence:
    {¶45} “Madrigal assumes that the inquiry for the court is whether the
    motion to suppress would have been granted had it been filed, as if a
    probable granting of the motion to suppress meets the prejudice prong.
    However, assuming arguendo that counsel should have filed the motion,
    Madrigal cannot meet the prejudice prong of Strickland, that is, there exists
    “a reasonable probability that absent [Madrigal’s attorneys’] errors, the
    factfinder would have had a reasonable doubt respecting guilty.” Strickland
    at 695, 104 S. Ct. at 2068. Even assuming that Madrigal’s suppression
    Washington App. No. 12CA9                                                     22
    motion would have been granted, and the gun would have been excluded,
    compelling evidence against him still existed.” Morrison, ¶ 10,11, and 12.
    B. LEGAL ANALYSIS
    (1) Counsel’s failure to file a motion to suppress the recorded
    statement of Appellant to Chief Deputy Warden.
    {¶46} In this matter, Appellant’s counsel did not file a motion to
    suppress Appellant’s statement to Chief Deputy Warden. On appeal,
    counsel argues it is clear from the evidence that Appellant was significantly
    impaired at the time he gave his statement. As such, it is argued Appellant
    could not effect a knowing and voluntary waiver of his Miranda rights.
    According to Lorena Smith, Appellant was still recovering from his injuries
    in a motorcycle accident and unable to walk well. On the day before the
    murder, Appellant had consumed 36 beers and had been acting unruly. She
    insisted he leave her house and she drove him to his trailer, leaving him with
    72 more beers to drink.
    {¶47} Timothy Jenkins, who saw Appellant between 12:30 and 1:00
    a.m. on June 19t, also testified Appellant had been drinking.
    {¶48} Shane Lucas testified that Appellant showed up at his home
    between 4:30 and 5:00 a.m. on June 19th, and together they bought and
    drank 3 six-packs of Busch Light beer. When Appellant went boating with
    the Lucas family, he passed out. Counsel also points out Appellant was tased
    Washington App. No. 12CA9                                                     23
    at the Stroud’s Run campground prior to giving his statement and was found
    incompetent to stand trial approximately two months after these events.
    {¶49} “[I]t is well-settled that the taking of an involuntary confession
    violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. See, e.g.,
    Spano v. New York, 
    360 U.S. 315
     * * *(1959). A coerced confession may
    also be found to violate the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-
    incrimination.” State v. Klapka, 
    2004-Ohio-2921
    , 
    2004 WL 1238411
    , ¶17,
    citing State v. Comstock, 11th Dist. No. 96-A-0058, 
    1997 Ohio App. LEXIS 3670
     (Apr. 15, 1997), at *7. “The question of voluntariness is a question of
    law, and as such, an appellate court must independently review the facts to
    arrive at its own conclusion as to whether a given confession was
    voluntary.” 
    Id.
     at *6-*7 (citations omitted). The state bears the burden of
    establishing the voluntariness of a confession by a preponderance of the
    evidence. Colorado v. Connelly, 
    479 U.S. 1577
    , 168-169, 
    107 S. Ct. 515
    (1986).
    {¶30} “In deciding whether a defendant’s confession is involuntarily
    induced, the court should consider the totality of the circumstances,
    including the age, mentality, and prior criminal experience of the accused;
    the length, intensity, and frequency of interrogation; the existence of
    physical deprivation or mistreatment; and the existence of threat or
    Washington App. No. 12CA9                                                     24
    inducement.” State v. Edwards, 
    49 Ohio St. 2d 31
    , 
    358 N.E.2d 1051
     (1976),
    paragraph two of the syllabus. State v. Michael, 4th Dist. No. 09CA887,
    
    2010-Ohio-5296
    , 
    2010 WL 4273225
    , ¶ 9. A statement is voluntary “absent
    evidence that [the suspect’s] will was overborne and his capacity for self-
    determination was critically impaired because of coercive police conduct.”
    State v. Dailey, 
    53 Ohio St.3d 88
    , 
    559 N.E.2d 459
     (1990), paragraph two of
    the syllabus.
    {¶31} In the case at bar, we do not believe a motion to suppress
    would have had a reasonable probability of success. In considering the
    totality of the circumstances, the trial court would likely have found
    Appellant’s statement to Chief Deputy Mark Warden to be knowing and
    voluntary. It is also likely the trial court would have found no evidence that
    Appellant’s will was overborn by coercive police conduct.
    {¶32} At the time Appellant gave his statement to Warden, he was
    49 years old. The evidence does demonstrate Appellant was in handcuffs
    and complained about the handcuffs and being tased. He had an adult
    criminal history which included three convictions for domestic violence and
    one conviction for aggravated menacing. There is no evidence in the record
    or on the recorded statement that Appellant was threatened or made
    promises in exchange for his statement. In fact, Appellant specifically
    Washington App. No. 12CA9                                                   25
    showed verbalized willingness to talk to Chief Deputy Mark Warden. We
    disagree that Appellant’s being tased, his subsequent mental incompetency,
    and his heavy use of intoxicants rendered his recorded statement
    involuntarily given.
    {¶33} Although Appellant had been drinking heavily for at least 2
    days and indicated he had consumed cocaine, some of the effects of these
    intoxicants ostensibly may have worn off by the time his statement was
    given. Appellant’s statement began at 4:15 p.m. and continued for
    approximately 51 minutes. There is no evidence that he drank anything
    after the beer he consumed with Shane Lucas around 5:30 a.m. that morning.
    According to Shane Lucas’s testimony, Appellant passed out on his boat.
    When he was apprehended at the campground, he was sleeping on a park
    bench. At the time Appellant gave his statement, 4:15 p.m., Appellant may
    have been “hung over” and just awakened, but he may not necessarily have
    been under the full influence of the intoxicants. In addition, due to his
    history of heavy alcohol and drug use over the years, especially at
    Thanksgiving and Christmas, Appellant may have been able to tolerate large
    amounts of intoxicants more functionally than the average person.
    {¶34} More importantly, Appellant’s statement to Mark Warden,
    although rambling, was consistently self-serving and calculated.
    Washington App. No. 12CA9                                                      26
    Throughout the statement, Appellant repeatedly denied knowing where he
    had been the previous night, knowing what he was being asked about,
    knowing what happened at the Rogers’ home, and knowing what happened
    to Homer Rogers. Appellant stated “I know I didn’t kill him.”
    {¶35} Although Appellant had been drinking heavily in the previous
    days, he had the presence of mind to present alternative theories as to what
    happened to Rogers. Appellant informed that Lynn and her father had been
    calling him, taunting him, and threatening to kill him. Appellant informed
    that Rogers had raped his daughter Lynn, in an effort to portray the decedent
    as a bad man. Appellant informed that Lynn had “begged” him to kill her
    father and informed that Lynn stood to inherit a lot of money upon her
    father’s death, in an effort to cast suspicion upon Lynn. Appellant also
    responded confidently that Shane Lucas “did not see him” drive the red
    pickup truck onto the trash pile.
    {¶36} We also disagree with Appellant’s argument that his alleged
    lack of competency influenced his giving the recorded statement to Chief
    Deputy Warden. In September 2010, the court found Appellant incompetent
    to stand trial and mentally ill. Appellant was admitted to Moritz Forensic
    Center of Twin Valley Behavioral Healthcare on October 14, 2010, for a
    course of treatment and competency restoration. In March, 2011, Dr.
    Washington App. No. 12CA9                                                 27
    Dennish Eshbaugh, PhD., prepared a status report regarding Appellant’s
    competency restoration. This report casts doubt on Appellant’s previous
    claim of incompetency due to mental illness. Dr. Eshbaugh’s report
    observes:
    Over the course of admission the medical records report
    that he has not presented signs or symptoms of serious mental
    illness. His thinking has continued to be clear and he has not
    expressed delusional material…His psychiatrist has noted that
    the defendant tends to present a depressive demeanor in his
    presence, but when the defendant is socializing with other
    patients and the staff his affect becomes bright and
    robust….After reviewing the documentation of the defendant’s
    participation in treatment groups and competency restoration
    programming, there is evidence that the defendant has been
    malingering memory deficits. His performance in treatment
    groups has been noted as effective. He actively participates in
    groups that focus on topics such as depression, coping skills,
    substance abuse, etc., and in those groups he does not show any
    significant difficulty understanding and learning new material.
    … While his memory functions have been reported to be intact
    in most activities, in competency restoration programming his
    performance has been poor. He has reportedly acted as if he
    has difficulty understanding and learning the material
    presented. He has continued to report that he has no recall any
    events associated with the instant charges. Because of the
    inconsistency of memory between groups his psychiatrist has
    continued the diagnosis of malingering memory deficits.
    {¶37} Based on our review of the record, we do not believe a motion
    to suppress would have been successful. As such, we cannot find Appellant
    was prejudiced by counsel’s failure to file the motion.
    Washington App. No. 12CA9                                                   28
    {¶38} Similar to the analysis in Madrigal, had a motion to suppress
    been filed and granted, there was still overwhelming evidence of Appellant’s
    guilt. Appellant had been making disturbing phone calls to the decedent’s
    house on June 18th, so intimidating that the testimony was Homer Rogers
    was considering calling law enforcement. Appellant’s daughter, Lorena
    Smith, admitted Appellant had been making threats against Lynn and Homer
    in the days just before the murder.
    {¶39} There was also testimony that Appellant was familiar with the
    woods and area between his trailer and the Rogers’ home, and he was
    familiar with the Rogers’ home. Although Lorena Smith testified she did
    not think her father could have walked the 2-3 mile walk between the
    homes, she admitted he was walking with a limp and had walked with her to
    a store recently. Tim Jenkins testified he had seen Appellant at a party
    during the early hours of June 19th, and although he had been drinking and
    was limping, he was able to walk. Mr. Jenkins also considered Appellant
    able to drive.
    {¶40} Kimberly Schaefer, Rogers’ daughter, testified her father’s
    truck was in his yard when he left her home late on June 18th. The next
    morning, the truck was gone. The decedent’s red pickup truck was
    eventually discovered in a wooded area, partially obscured, at Shane Lucas’s
    Washington App. No. 12CA9                                                     29
    house in Athens County, where Appellant had gone on June 19th. The car
    trailer attached to the truck was discovered at Appellant’s trailer on June
    19th. When Appellant presented to Shane Lucas’s door at 4:30 or 5:00 a.m.
    in the morning, wanting to go buy beer, he indicated he had been dropped
    off by a friend. Shane Lucas was unaware the vehicle was parked on his
    property until the investigation unfolded.
    {¶41} Moreover, when the red pickup truck was discovered, a knife
    with the reddish-brown substance, later determined to be blood, was
    discovered in the center console. Raymond Peoples testified that when he
    analyzed the DNA samples taken from the knife, both Appellant’s and
    decedent’s DNA profile mixtures were found on the blade of the knife.
    Only Appellant’s DNA was found on the handle of the knife. Lynn Rogers
    later testified that this knife was one of three Appellant and she bought a few
    months before. The other two knives were located in a can in Appellant’s
    trailer.
    {¶42} More damaging than Appellant’s recorded statement to Chief
    Deputy Warden was his confession to Shane Lucas. Mr. Lucas testified
    Appellant, while crying, admitted stabbing the decedent in the neck, laying
    the decedent on the couch, and covering decedent’s body with a blanket.
    Washington App. No. 12CA9                                                       30
    {¶43} Assuming a motion to suppress the recorded statement to Mark
    Warden had been filed and granted, the transcript is replete with additional
    compelling evidence, direct and circumstantial, of Appellant’s guilt. We do
    not find Appellant was prejudiced by counsel’s failure to file a motion to
    suppress.
    (2) Counsel’s failure to object to the playing of Appellant’s
    statement to Chief Deputy Warden at trial.
    {¶44} At trial, Appellant’s counsel did not object to the introduction
    of his recorded statement to Chief Deputy Warden. As such, this alleged
    error is governed by the plain error standard. Under Crim.R.52(B), “[p]lain
    errors or defects affecting substantial rights may be noticed although they
    were not brought to the attention of the court.” State v. Haynes, 
    130 Ohio App.3d 31
    , 
    719 N.E.2d 576
    , (4th Dist. 1998), Fn 3. The judgment of the
    trial court will be reversed under the plain error rule only if (1) error has
    occurred and, (2) but for that error, the result of the trial would clearly have
    been otherwise. 
    Id.
     at Fn 3. See State v. Underwood, 
    3 Ohio St.3d 12
    , 
    444 N.E.2d 1332
    . The rule should be applied with utmost caution and should be
    invoked only to prevent a clear miscarriage of justice. Haynes, at Fn 3.
    {¶45} Furthermore, the decision not to object to the playing of
    Appellant’s recorded statement to Chief Deputy Warden may have
    amounted to a tactical decision. Generally, counsel’s strategic decisions and
    Washington App. No. 12CA9                                                      31
    trial tactics will not support a claim of ineffective assistance. State v.
    Morrison, 4th Dist. No. 03CA13, 2004 Ohio -5724, 
    2004 WL 2421875
    , ¶ 8.
    {¶46} In this matter, the defense’s trial strategy, apparently, was to
    attempt to create reasonable doubt as to Appellant’s guilt by casting
    suspicion upon his estranged ex-wife, Lynn Rogers. The defense’s theory of
    Appellant’s case was that Lynn Rogers hated her ex-husband, may have
    hated her father, and/or desired to inherit $600,000.00. Trial counsel argued
    in closing that Lynn Rogers or Wayne McClain were never investigated, and
    from the beginning, and Lynn steered the investigation in the direction of her
    husband. The defense needed to show why Lynn may have hated her father
    enough to plan his death. Appellant’s allegation that the decedent raped
    Lynn Rogers is contained in the recorded statement. The defense also
    needed the jury to know Lynn had a financial incentive to do so. Appellant
    also accomplishes this objective via the recorded statement.
    {¶47} Again, as previously discussed above, there was overwhelming
    evidence of Appellant’s guilt. In our view, had the recorded statement to
    Chief Deputy Warden been excluded, there was still compelling evidence to
    find Appellant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt on each element of the
    crimes charged. We find no error, let alone plain error, in this regard. We
    further find no prejudice to the defendant by counsel’s decision not to object.
    Washington App. No. 12CA9                                                     32
    (3) Counsel’s failure to object to the statements of Cynthia Lynn
    Rogers regarding alleged prior bad acts of Appellant.
    {¶48} We also believe that the decision not to object to the admission
    of Lynn Roger’s statements clearly amounts to a tactical decision on trial
    counsel’s part. To further advance the theory that Lynn Rogers orchestrated
    or facilitated her father’s murder and “set up” Appellant, the jury needed to
    believe Lynn Rogers despised Appellant. To do so, the jury needed to be
    aware of Lynn’s history of physical abuse by Appellant. Again, no objection
    was lodged as to Lynn Rogers’ testimony about Appellant’s years of
    physically abusing her.
    {¶49} In our view, trial counsel was exercising professionally
    reasonable trial strategy. There exists a “strong presumption that counsel’s
    conduct falls within the wide range of reasonable professional assistance.”
    Robinson, at ¶ 2, citing Strickland, 466 U.S. at 689, 104 S. Ct. at 2065.
    Furthermore, “strategy and tactical decisions exercised by defense counsel
    ‘well within the range of professionally reasonable judgment’ need not be
    analyzed by a reviewing court.” Robinson ¶2, citing State v. Walker, 
    90 Ohio App.3d 352
    , 259, 
    629 N.E.2d 471
    , 475 (1993), quoting Strickland, 466 U.S.
    at 699, 104 S. Ct. at 2070. In this matter, we are not convinced that
    counsel’s failure to object to the statements of Lynn Rogers regarding
    Washington App. No. 12CA9                                                       33
    alleged physical abuse over the years prejudiced Appellant so as to deprive
    him of a fair trial.
    {¶50} Based upon the foregoing, we cannot find Appellant was
    prejudiced by his counsel’s (1) failure to file a motion to suppress the
    recorded statement given to Chief Deputy Warden, (2) failure to object to
    the playing of that statement at trial, or (3) failure to object to the admission
    of Cynthia Lynn Rogers’ statements regarding alleged prior physical abuse
    by Appellant. Therefore, we cannot find Appellant received constitutionally
    ineffective assistance of counsel under the Strickland analysis. As such, we
    overrule Appellant’s first assignment of error.
    ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR TWO
    {¶51} Appellant also contends the trial court erred by failing to
    grant Defendant-Appellant’s Rule 29 motion to dismiss the charge of
    tampering with evidence. After presentation of the State’s case, defense
    counsel moved to dismiss the tampering with evidence charge. The State
    argued that Appellant took Homer Rogers’ truck, containing the murder
    weapon to another county and drove it into a weeded area so as to hide it
    from view. Appellant argued the truck was in plain view from the road
    nearby. The trial court denied the Crim.R. 29 motion and let the charge go
    Washington App. No. 12CA9                                                      34
    to the jury. On appeal, Appellant argues there was no evidence to justify the
    charge being given to the jury for consideration. We disagree.
    A. STANDARD OF REVIEW
    {¶52} The standard of review for a Crim.R. 29(A) motion is
    Generally the same as a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence. State v.
    Hollis, 4th Dist. No. 09CA9, 
    2010-Ohio-3945
    , 
    2010 WL 3294327
    , ¶19. See
    State v. Hairston, 4th Dist. No. 06CA3081, 2007 Ohio-3880, 
    2007 WL 2181535
    , at ¶ 16; State v. Brooker, 
    170 Ohio App.3d 570
    , 
    2007-Ohio-588
    ,
    
    868 N.E.2d 683
    , at ¶8. Appellate courts must determine whether the
    evidence adduced at trial, if believed, supports a finding of guilt beyond a
    reasonable doubt. See State v. Thompkins, 
    78 Ohio St.3d 380
    , 386, 1997-
    Ohio-52, 
    678 N.E.2d 541
    ; State v. Jenkins, 
    61 Ohio St.3d 259
    , 
    574 N.E.2d 492
     (1991).
    {¶53} In other words, when reviewing a case to determine if the
    record contains sufficient evidence to support a criminal conviction, we must
    “examine 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 relevant inquiry is whether, after viewing
    the evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of
    fact could have found the essential elements of the crime proven beyond a
    Washington App. No. 12CA9                                                        35
    reasonable doubt.” Hollis, ¶20, citing State v. Smith, 4th Dist. No. 06CA7,
    
    2007-Ohio-502
    , 
    2007 WL 357274
    , at ¶ 33, quoting State v. Jenkins at
    paragraph two of the syllabus. See, also, Jackson v. Virginia, 
    443 U.S. 307
    ,
    319, 
    99 S. Ct. 2781
     (1979).
    {¶54} The sufficiency of the evidence test “raises a question of law
    and does not allow us to weigh the evidence,” Hollis at ¶21; Smith at ¶34,
    citing State v. Martin, 
    20 Ohio App.3d 172
    , 175, 
    485 N.E.2d 717
     (1983).
    Instead, the sufficiency of the evidence test “‘gives full play to the
    responsibility of the trier of fact [to fairly] resolve conflicts in the testimony,
    to weigh the evidence, and to draw reasonable inferences from basic facts to
    ultimate facts.’” Smith at ¶34, citing State v. Thomas, 
    70 Ohio St. 2d 79
    , 79-
    80, 
    434 N.E.2d 1356
     (1982); State v. DeHass, 
    10 Ohio St.2d 230
    , 
    227 N.E. 2d 212
     (1967), paragraph one of the syllabus.
    B. LEGAL ANALYSIS
    {¶55} Appellant was convicted of tampering with evidence, in
    violation of R.C. 2921.12(A)(1), which reads:
    (A) No person, knowing that an official proceeding or
    investigation is in progress, or is about to be or likely to be instituted,
    shall do any of the following:
    (1) Alter, destroy, conceal, or remove any record, document, or
    thing, with purpose to impair its value or availability as evidence in
    such proceedings or investigation….
    Washington App. No. 12CA9                                                      36
    At the end of the State’s case, the trial court had heard evidence that:
    1) Homer Roger’s death was caused by a knife wound;
    2) a knife with a reddish-brown substances was found inside Rogers’
    pickup truck that had been removed from his yard in Washington
    County and removed to a wooded area in Athens County;
    3) the knife was tested by specialists at Ohio BCI who determined that
    the DNA profile on the handle of the knife matched Gerald Smith’s
    profile, and the DNA profile on the blade of the knife was a mixture
    of Homer Rogers’ and Gerald Smith’s DNA profiles;
    4) Appellant had arrived at the Lucas residence in the early morning
    hours of June 19, 2010, on foot; and,
    5) the decedent’s pickup truck was discovered parked on the Lucas
    property later on June 19th.
    {¶56} We believe that the trial transcript contains evidence from
    which any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of
    the tampering with evidence charge proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
    {¶57} As to the element of “knowing that an official proceeding or
    investigation is in progress, or is about to be or likely to be instituted,” the
    trial court heard evidence that Appellant confessed to Shane Lucas of
    shooting or stabbing the decedent, placing his body on the couch, and
    covering it up. From this evidence, the logical inference is that Appellant
    would be aware that because of the seriousness of his actions, an official
    proceeding or investigation would be likely to be instituted.
    Washington App. No. 12CA9                                                       37
    {¶58} As to the elements of “conceal or remove, any… thing…with
    purpose to impair is…availability as evidence,” the trial court had the
    testimony of the various State’s witnesses who demonstrated that the murder
    weapon- the bloody knife with the DNA of both victim and suspect- was
    found in the decedent’s red pickup truck. The decedent’s pickup truck had
    been in his yard in Washington County, the night before, according to his
    daughter. Various State’s witnesses testified the pickup truck was discovered
    in a wooded area in Athens County, partially obscured by tall weeds and
    woods. Mark Johnson testified the Lucas residence was nearly 100 yards
    from Salem Road. The red pickup truck was found parked 30-40 yards
    beyond the residence. Appellant had appeared at the Lucas residence in the
    early morning hours of June 19th, on foot, claiming he had been dropped
    off. Shane Lucas testified Appellant had driven the truck before but parked
    it in the area of the house, not up into the woods. From these facts, it may be
    inferred Appellant was attempting to conceal or remove the bloody knife in
    the pickup truck in a desperate effort to thwart or stymie any investigation,
    or to diminish the value of the knife and truck as evidence.
    {¶59} We find that there was sufficient evidence on each element of
    the tampering charge to allow it to go to the jury. As such, we find the trial
    court did not err by denying Appellant’s Crim.R. 29 motion to dismiss the
    Washington App. No. 12CA9                                                  38
    tampering charge. We affirm the judgment of the trial court and overrule
    Appellant’s second assignment of error.
    JUDGMENT AFFIRMED.
    Washington App. No. 12CA9                                                                   39
    JUDGMENT ENTRY
    It is ordered that the JUDGMENT BE AFFIRMED and costs herein be taxed to
    Appellant.
    The Court finds there were reasonable grounds for this appeal.
    It is ordered that a special mandate issue out of this Court directing the
    Washington County Common Pleas Court to carry this judgment into execution.
    IF A STAY OF EXECUTION OF SENTENCE AND RELEASE UPON BAIL
    HAS BEEN PREVIOUSLY GRANTED BY THE TRIAL COURT OR THIS COURT, it
    is temporarily continued for a period not to exceed sixty days upon the bail previously
    posted. The purpose of a continued stay is to allow Appellant to file with the Supreme
    Court of Ohio an application for a stay during the pendency of proceedings in that court.
    If a stay is continued by this entry, it will terminate at the earlier of the expiration of the
    sixty day period, or the failure of the Appellant to file a notice of appeal with the
    Supreme Court of Ohio in the forty-five day appeal period pursuant to Rule II, Sec. 2 of
    the Rules of Practice of the Supreme Court of Ohio. Additionally, if the Supreme Court
    of Ohio dismisses the appeal prior to expiration of sixty days, the stay will terminate as of
    the date of such dismissal.
    A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to Rule 27 of
    the Rules of Appellate Procedure.
    Exceptions.
    Harsha, J. & Abele, J.: Concur in Judgment and Opinion.
    For the Court,
    BY:     _______________________
    Matthew W. McFarland
    Presiding Judge
    NOTICE TO COUNSEL
    Pursuant to Local Rule No. 14, this document constitutes a final judgment
    entry and the time period for further appeal commences from the date of filing with
    the clerk.