The Ohio Court of Appeals has upheld the conviction of Roger Lee Thompson for felonious assault and related charges stemming from a shooting incident outside a Canton business. The court's ruling, issued on September 3, 2026, affects Thompson, who faces a significant prison sentence, and highlights issues surrounding evidence and jury instructions in criminal cases.
The case, State v. Thompson (2025CA00132), originated from an incident that occurred on April 12, 2025, when Thompson and a co-defendant allegedly fired multiple gunshots at a vehicle outside the Shorb Drive Thru. The court's decision emphasizes the importance of video evidence and witness testimony in establishing guilt in criminal proceedings.
Thompson was indicted by a Stark County Grand Jury on several charges, including felonious assault with firearm specifications, discharge of a firearm on or near prohibited premises, and having weapons while under disability. He pleaded not guilty to all charges. The shooting incident involved witnesses who reported hearing gunfire and seeing two men, one of whom was identified as Thompson, firing at a passing vehicle.
Witness testimony played a crucial role in the trial. C.S., a key witness, described hearing gunshots while driving near the Shorb Drive Thru. She saw two men in an alley, but could not identify them. Another witness, J.H., provided video evidence from her doorbell camera that captured one of the suspects firing a gun. Police also reviewed surveillance footage from the Shorb Drive Thru, which showed two men entering the store shortly before the shooting.
Detective Michael Brown, who investigated the case, testified about the video evidence and the recovery of shell casings at the crime scene. The police were able to track the movements of Thompson's co-defendant, V.W., using GPS data from an ankle monitor, which placed him at the scene of the shooting. This information was critical in linking both men to the crime.
After a jury trial, Thompson was found guilty on all counts, including the firearm specification. The trial court sentenced him to an indefinite term of eight to twelve years for felonious assault, along with additional consecutive sentences for the firearm specification and repeat violent offender specification, resulting in a total sentence of sixteen to twenty years.
Thompson appealed the conviction, raising several issues, including claims of prejudicial error related to jury instructions and the admission of video evidence. He argued that the trial court improperly informed the jury of his repeat violent offender status and that the video evidence was not properly authenticated.
The Ohio Court of Appeals, presided over by Judge Craig R. Baldwin, ruled that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in providing a curative instruction to the jury after the mention of the repeat violent offender specification. The court noted that Thompson's defense counsel had opted for a curative instruction instead of a mistrial, which limited his ability to challenge the instruction's effectiveness on appeal.
The court stated, "The mention of the specification to the jury was error, and the State does not contend otherwise...the appellant elected not to request a mistrial and instead requested that the existing jury be given a curative instruction."
Regarding the video evidence, the court found that Detective Brown's testimony sufficiently authenticated the footage from the Shorb Drive Thru. The court emphasized that the standard for authentication is low and that the detective's familiarity with the area and the store's surveillance system met this threshold.
In addressing Thompson's claims about the sufficiency and weight of the evidence, the court concluded that the jury had enough circumstantial evidence to find Thompson guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The court noted that while there was no direct eyewitness identification, the combination of video evidence, recovered clothing, and GPS data supported the jury's verdict.
The court stated, "After viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the State, the jury could have found the essential elements of each offense proven beyond a reasonable doubt, and could have found beyond a reasonable doubt that the appellant was one of the two men who fired at C.S.’s vehicle."
The ruling has significant implications for Thompson, who will serve a lengthy prison sentence. It also underscores the challenges defendants face when appealing convictions based on claims of evidentiary errors and jury instructions. The decision reinforces the importance of video evidence and witness testimony in criminal cases, particularly those involving firearms.
Looking ahead, Thompson has the option to pursue further legal action, including a potential appeal to the Ohio Supreme Court, although the likelihood of success remains uncertain. The case highlights ongoing issues in the criminal justice system related to the handling of evidence and the rights of defendants.