Youngstown Daily Legal News

East side murderer loses appeal

JESSICA SHAMBAUGH
Special to the Legal News
Published: September 30, 2014

A man found guilty of murder recently lost his appeal when the 10th District Court of Appeals ruled that the evidence against him properly supported his convictions.

The Franklin County Court of Common Pleas found Derrick Peeples guilty of the shooting death of Jerome Crockett in the early morning hours of Aug. 25, 2012.

Crockett died just outside of Klub 57 on Beechwood Road in Columbus, where he was shot while walking to the car with Tina and Carla Taylor, Carol Obey and Demitra Conde.

The women told police they heard the shooter demand money and Crockett laughed and put his hands in the air.

That’s when the man fired multiple gunshots and fled the scene.

Crockett and the women ran across the street where Crockett collapsed. He later died of a gunshot wound to the chest.

The common pleas court found Peeples guilty of aggravated robbery, aggravated murder, murder and having a weapon while under disability.

It sentenced him to 52 years to life in prison and he appealed to the 10th District, challenging both the sufficiency and manifest weight of the evidence against him.

Upon review, the three-judge appellate panel found that all four women who were present at the shooting testified against Peeples.

In the days following the shooting, Conde and Carla identified Peeples as the shooter in a photo lineup. They identified him again during the trial.

Conde told the court she recognized Peeples as someone who grew up in her neighborhood and that she noticed him in the bar prior to the shooting.

She said she only consumed two or three drinks that night and was not intoxicated at the time of the shooting.

Because the parking lot was well-lit, Conde said she saw that the shooter was a black male with braided hair, wearing denim shorts, a white T-shirt and Air Jordan shoes.

Carla gave similar testimony. She said she was able to get a good look at the shooter because the parking lot was brightly lit.

She said the man had braided hair, denim shorts and only came up to Crockett’s chest.

She testified that she saw the man pull a gun from his pocket and then heard three shots. She also said she only had two drinks at the bar and was not drunk.

Obey testified that she could not identify the shooter but she could give a general description.

She said the man was only about 5-foot-2-inches and was a black male wearing a white T-shirt and jeans.

She also recalled him asking Crockett for money before shooting him.

Tina also remembered the shooter asking Crockett for money then firing multiple gunshots.

She described the shooter as “not very tall at all” but was unable to identify him.

Peeples claimed that the women were not able to identify the shooter because they did not see him for long enough.

He said the lack of identification and physical evidence connecting him to the crime required a reversal of his convictions. The appellate judges disagreed.

“The witnesses consistently described that, prior to shooting, appellant demanded money from Mr. Crockett. The witnesses also consistently recounted the physical description of appellant, including two witnesses identifying appellant as the shooter and the other two giving corroborating testimony as to appellant’s physical stature, hairstyle, and clothing,” Judge Betsy Luper Schuster wrote for the court.

The judges noted that the witnesses all heard multiple gunshots after seeing Peeples demand money and then saw Crockett collapse with a bullet wound to his chest.

They held that the jury was free to consider the entire set of circumstances and infer Peeples’ intent based on the facts.

“Accordingly, when viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the state, we conclude the state presented sufficient evidence for appellant’s convictions,” Judge Luper Schuster stated.

Peeples next asserted that his convictions were against the manifest weight of the evidence because there was not physical evidence.

The judges, however, maintained that physical evidence is not required to uphold a conviction.

“While no physical evidence connects appellant to the shooting, as noted above, two witnesses identified appellant as the shooter; one witness testified she saw the shooter pull a gun out of his pocket; five witnesses testified to hearing the gunshots; and Mr. Crockett died as a result of a gunshot wound,” Judge Luper Schuster stated.

The judges ruled that the testimony given at trial could have clearly established that Peeples shot Crockett if the jury found it credible.

The jury’s findings demonstrated that it chose to believe the women and the appellate panel refused to alter those findings.

“We conclude appellant’s convictions were supported by legally sufficient evidence and were not against the manifest weight of the evidence. Accordingly, we overrule appellant’s assignment of error and affirm the decision of the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas.”

Presiding Judge Lisa Sadler and Judge Susan Brown concurred.

The case is cited State v. Peeples, 2014-Ohio-4064.

[Back]