State v. Winters - Supreme Court of Ohio - State of Ohio

directions and Ostrander told appellant which way to turn so that they could get away from
the store.
11.
{ 25} As the police were pulling the car over, Ostrander told appellant to deny
having been at Wal-Mart. At the same time, appellant was questioning Ostrander as to
whether he had stolen something from the gas station or Wal-Mart. Ostrander denied
owning the snips that were found in the car and believed they belonged to appellant whom
Ostrander knew was having trouble with his car stereo and had plans to fix it. Ostrander
denied knowing that appellant and Reichard had foil, a magnetic key, and snips on them.
{ 26} Ostrander testified that he did not get a deal for testifying, but was doing so
only because appellant was his friend and believed that appellant should not get in trouble
for something Ostrander did.
{ 27} In his first assignment of error, appellant argues that there was insufficient
evidence to convict him of complicity to commit theft and possession of criminal tools.
{ 28} A challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence is a question of law. State v.
Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380, 386, reconsideration denied (1997), 79 Ohio St.3d 1451.
The standard for determining whether there is sufficient evidence to support a conviction
is whether the evidence admitted at trial, "if believed, would convince the average mind of
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 reasonable doubt."
State v. Jenks (1991), 61 Ohio St.3d 259, paragraph two of the syllabus, citing Jackson v.