Youngstown Daily Legal News

Assailant who refused to shake hands loses appeal

ANNIE YAMSON
Special to the Legal News
Published: March 26, 2015

In the 8th District Court of Appeals, a panel of three judges recently reviewed the case of Terry Edgerson, a man convicted of two counts of aggravated assault in the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas.

The reviewing panel affirmed the judgment of the lower court in part but remanded the case so the Cuyahoga County court can merge Edgerson’s convictions and decide on which aggravated assault count to proceed for sentencing.

The charges against Edgerson stemmed from a physical confrontation between Edgerson and the victim, whose name was not disclosed.

According to the testimony and evidence presented at trial, on Sept. 25, 2013 Edgerson was eating a meal at the apartment of Delise Coleman.

The victim, who lived in the same apartment complex, stopped by Coleman’s apartment to deliver beer that she had asked for earlier in the day.

Coleman invited the victim in and he proceeded to introduce himself to Edgerson by extending his hand for a handshake.

However, the victim reached over Edgerson’s food to do so and Edgerson refused to shake his hand because he was eating.

The victim, who was highly intoxicated according to medical records and his trial testimony, became agitated and directed insults at Edgerson.

At that point, Coleman asked the victim to leave her apartment.

According to the victim, as he waited for an elevator outside of Coleman’s apartment, Edgerson came at him with a knife.

“While both the victim and Edgerson dispute who started the fight, it is undisputed that the fight ended with the victim breaking Edgerson’s jaw and the victim being stabbed three times,” case summary states.

Unsure of who to charge in the affray, the Cuyahoga County Prosecutor presented the case to a grand jury, resulting in Edgerson’s indictment on two counts of aggravated assault, one of which included the use of deadly force and the other, the use of a deadly weapon.

Coleman was also indicted for allegedly causing one of the stab wounds to the victim.

Edgerson was subsequently found guilty on both counts as charged and was sentenced to two, concurrent 15-month prison terms which were suspended.

He was also placed on two years of probation with conditions attached.

On appeal, Edgerson argued that his counsel was ineffective for failing to request a jury instruction on self-defense.

The court of appeals found little to support his argument.

“In this case, defense counsel chose to proceed on the theory that Edgerson did not cause the harmful injury to the victim because he did not have a knife with him when the fight occurred,” Judge Melody Stewart wrote on behalf of the appellate panel. “It is not unreasonable that defense counsel chose not to proceed with asking for a self-defense instruction.”

Similarly, Edgerson claimed that his convictions were against the manifest weight of the evidence because the jury was not provided with complete instructions that would permit it to consider the applicability of self-defense.

“We take issue with this argument for several reasons,” Stewart noted, first pointing out that a challenge to jury instructions is a “conceptually different argument” than one that challenges the manifest weight of the evidence.

Additionally, the court of appeals held that by framing his argument in such a manner, Edgerson “impliedly concedes that the evidence did support his judgment of conviction on the charges.”

“The rationale behind his argument his that he was convicted not because the evidence did not support a guilty verdict, but because the jury was not able to consider a claim of self-defense,” Stewart wrote.

The appellate panel found that Edgerson never requested a jury instruction on self defense and it noted that self-defense was “hardly even suggested” as a possible defense at trial.

Stewart wrote that self defense is an affirmative defense, which requires a defendant to admit that he committed the essential elements of a charged crime before providing a justification for the admitted conduct.

“Edgerson never admitted to the elements of the crime of aggravated assault,” Stewart wrote.

At trial, Edgerson denied harming the victim and his defense was simply that he did not have a knife and had no idea how the victim was injured. He even suggested that the wounds could have been self-inflicted.

“Therefore, it is logically and legally inconsistent for Edgerson to deny the charges claimed by the state, principally that he did not cause bodily harm to the victim, while also asserting that he acted in self-defense,” Stewart wrote.

The appellate panel went on to consider Edgerson’s claim that his offenses should have merged for sentencing.

Since the state conceded the error, the case was remanded for the Cuyahoga County court to merge the assaults and consider which would form the basis for a new sentence.

Judges Frank Celebrezze and Tim McCormack joined Stewart to form the majority.

The case is cited State v. Edgerson, 2015-Ohio-593.

[Back]