The Akron Legal News

Testimony of confession enough to convict thief

JESSICA SHAMBAUGH
Special to the Legal News
Published: August 28, 2013

The 12th District Court of Appeals issued an opinion this week affirming a Warren County man’s conviction for robbing a Dollar Tree Store in Franklin, Ohio.

Terry Bach Jr. appealed his conviction for robbery from the Warren County Common Pleas Court on the grounds that it was not supported by the weight of the evidence.

Presiding Judge Robert Ringland wrote the opinion for the court and said Bach’s arrest and subsequent charges stemmed from the robbery of the Dollar Tree Store on April 19, 2011.

At a jury trial in the Warren County court, two Dollar Tree workers testified they were working on the day in question when a man entered the store wearing jeans, boots and a hooded sweatshirt with the hood tied around his face.

They both described him as around six feet tall and weighing between 160 and 200 pounds.

The workers said they believed the man was armed because he kept his right hand in his pocked and seemed to point something.

One man said the robber told him “let me get that money” before taking the money and attempting to leave.

The robber unsuccessfully tried to leave through the entrance door before finding the correct door.

Neither of the workers were able to positively identify a suspect from a photo lineup.

James Banks testified that he was released from jail for an OVI on April 22, 2011 and he encountered Bach.

The two men went to high school together and drank a beer while they waited for Bach’s dad to give him a ride.

Banks said as they drank that Bach told him about robbing the Dollar Tree and said he hid the money behind the Beam Apartments.

When Bach’s father arrived, Banks went with them and stated that they stopped at the Beam Apartments and Bach left briefly, returning to the car with “dirty and watery money.”

Banks contacted the Franklin Police Department two weeks later and told them about the Dollar Tree robbery.

Despite his assistance in the case, he was convicted of OVI in his own case.

John Hall also testified that he knew Bach and that Bach had confessed to him about the robbery.

He also gave an accurate description of Bach’s clothing during the robbery.

According to Hall, Bach stashed the money and clothes behind the Beam Apartments and stole a beer from a convenience store in his underwear so that he would have an alibi.

Police testified that they found no evidence Hall and Banks knew each other, but their stories corroborated.

They further stated neither man benefited from testifying against Bach.

The jury found Bach guilty of robbery and he was sentenced to 18 months in prison.

On appeal to the 12th District, Bach argued that his conviction was against the manifest weight of the evidence.

“In determining whether a conviction is against the manifest weight of the evidence, the court, reviewing the entire record, weighs the evidence and all reasonable inferences, considers the credibility of the witnesses and determines whether in resolving conflicts in the evidence, the trier of fact clearly lost its way and created such a manifest miscarriage of justice that the conviction must be reversed and a new trial ordered,” Judge Ringland stated.

On review, the appellate judges found Bach’s father testified in his defense that the men were together and working on a rental house at the time of the robbery.

Another of Bach’s acquaintances testified he had dinner with Bach on the night in question.

A third man testified that Bach was working with his father on the rental house prior to Bach meeting his friend for dinner.

“In the case at bar, the jury had to give weight to and determine the credibility of the conflicting evidence before them,” Judge Ringland wrote.

The judges found that the store employees gave descriptions that reasonably applied to Bach and that two of Bach’s acquaintances testified Bach had confessed to the crime.

“Those two witnesses testified that they had not heard or read about the crime, other than what Bach had told them, prior to speaking to police. They further testified that they did not know one another, yet their testimony was corroborative,” Judge Ringland continued.

The judges found the jury had a right to find the state’s witnesses more credible than Bach’s and that the jury was in a better position to determine credibility.

“In believing the testimony of the state’s witnesses rather than Bach’s, we cannot find that the jury clearly lost its way and created such a manifest miscarriage of justice that the conviction must be reversed and a new trial ordered.”

Judges Michael Powell and Robin Piper concurred and affirmed the lower court’s ruling.

The case is cited State v. Bach, 2013-Ohio-3412.

[Back]