State v. Thomas

[Cite as State v. Thomas, 2026-Ohio-3152.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT LUCAS COUNTY State of Ohio Court of Appeals No. {48}L-25-00275 Appellee Trial Court No. CR0202402706 v. Michael R. Thomas DECISION AND JUDGMENT Appellant Decided: August 14, 2026 ***** Julia R. Bates, Lucas County Prosecuting Attorney, and Randy L. Meyer, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. Laurel A. Kendall, for appellant. ***** OSOWIK, P.J. {¶ 1} Appellant, Michael Thomas, appeals the October 28, 2025 decision of the Lucas County Court of Common Pleas sentencing him to an aggregate prison term of 21 to 25 years. For the following reasons, we affirm. I. Background and Facts {¶ 2} Thomas was indicted on one count of discharge of a firearm on or near a prohibited premises, in violation of R.C. 2923.162(A)(3), a third-degree felony; three counts of felonious assault in violation of R.C. 2903.11(A)(2), each a second-degree felony; one count of having weapons while under disability in violation of R.C. 2923.13(A)(2), a third-degree felony; and one count of tampering with evidence in violation of R.C. 2921.12(A)(1), a third-degree felony. The discharge of firearm and felonious assault charges each carried a firearm specification under R.C. 2941.145(A), and the felonious assault charges each carried a repeat violent offender specification under R.C. 2941.149(A). {¶ 3} Thomas’s case was tried to the court. At trial, the State presented the testimony of 20 witnesses. {¶ 4} Officer Philip Cook of the Toledo Police Department testified that he is responsible for retrieving 911 calls and call records. He presented the records of 14 calls to 911 about gunshots fired near Crox Bar on Arlington Avenue in Toledo in the early morning hours of November 17, 2024. {¶ 5} The callers generally reported that they heard between four and “at least 10” shots from the area of Crox but did not see who did the shooting. One caller reported that her neighbor saw a “kid” open up a car in an alley and grab what looked like an “automatic rifle.” One caller from an alarm company called to report a burglary alarm at a business near Crox. The point of entry was the glass. One caller heard the shots and squealing tires and a “revved up” engine but did not see anything. Another heard a car speeding away after hearing the shots. One caller saw “flashes” when the gun was shot. One said that he had heard “arguing” outside “all night.” One caller said that she had called earlier and was calling back to report more shots. The second round of shooting sounded like it came from two different guns, and the caller heard 20 to 30 shots. 2. Gunshots can be heard in the background at the beginning of this call. Another caller said that she had called earlier and was calling to report that she heard ten to 20 additional shots and saw a light blue or silver hatchback car drive off. {¶ 6} Officer Andrew Yarnell of the TPD testified that he was called to Crox around 1:00 a.m. because of reports of shots fired outside of the bar. He described Crox as a busy bar with a side patio enclosed by a privacy fence and with an alley leading to a parking lot. {¶ 7} The first crew that arrived on scene reported that they did not find anything to indicate that there had been a shooting, so the officers left. Yarnell remained nearby because he was concerned that something else might happen. He parked on Toronto Street across from Crox. After 20 to 30 minutes, he saw a white Jeep speed from the alley behind Crox, then pass by him twice more in different directions, which caught his attention. The Jeep parked in front of a convenience store on the corner of Arlington and Toronto, after which Yarnell heard approximately ten gunshots. After broadcasting a shots-fired call, Yarnell moved toward the corner of Arlington and Toronto and saw an older black male wearing all gray with a tan AR-15 rifle in front of Crox. The man had just fired into the Crox patio. Yarnell believed that he was witnessing a mass shooting, so he fired approximately 15 rounds to end the threat. He did not hit the shooter. After Yarnell shot at the shooter, the shooter got in the Jeep’s passenger seat, and the Jeep fled. Yarnell searched for, and eventually found, the Jeep. When he pulled the Jeep over, the shooter was not in the vehicle. 3.  {¶ 8} The State played Yarnell’s body camera footage. He did not hit the record button until after he shot at Thomas, so the shooting was not recorded. In the video, Yarnell is following a white Jeep with bullet holes in the driver’s side. He said that the passenger in the Jeep was the shooter, but when he pulled the Jeep over, there was no one else in the car. {¶ 9} On cross-examination, Yarnell explained that damage to the driver’s side of the Jeep was from his shots. The shooter finished shooting before Yarnell got out of his car; he never fired a round at Yarnell. {¶ 10} On redirect, Yarnell clarified that he saw the shooter clearly when the shooter moved from the Jeep toward Crox, that the car was not between them at that point, and that he was aiming at the shooter, not the Jeep. He also confirmed that he saw the shooter fire into Crox’s patio. {¶ 11} Robert testified that he lives on Atlantic Avenue, near Arlington Avenue, in Toledo, approximately two blocks from Crox. On November 17, 2024, Robert found a gun in his backyard. He was unfamiliar with guns and did not know whether the one in his backyard was a real gun, but after speaking to family members, he “found out what it was” and decided to turn it into the police station. He identified the gun marked as State’s exhibit 12 as the same one he found in his yard. {¶ 12} Officer Glendon Teems of the TPD testified that he received the gun from Robert when he brought it to the police station. There was no ammunition in the evidence box with the gun, which indicated to Teems that the gun’s magazine was empty 4. when he received it. There was nothing in his report about the gun having bullets in it, which he would have included if the gun came to him with ammunition in it. {¶ 13} On cross, Teems said that he thought that Robert brought the gun into the police station; he did not leave it in his car for officers to retrieve. He could not remember if the magazine was in the gun when he received it or if there were any bullets in the magazine. However, if the gun had bullets in it, he would have given them an evidence tag, which was not present. He did not write in his report that there was no ammunition in the gun. {¶ 14} Officer Jimmie Bennett of the TPD testified that he responded to the scene of the shooting outside of Crox around 2:00 a.m. after Yarnell said on the radio that he had fired his weapon. Once he was on scene, he canvassed the area. He found shell casings around the area of Arlington and Geneva Avenue. He also heard from a witness who reported that he had seen the shooter. The witness reported that “he saw a man wearing a gray sweatshirt and a gray beanie walking down the street with a—he said a AK47.” Bennett remembered the witness saying that he heard the shooter say “I let one off, but I’m not satisfied[,]” after which the shooter fired more rounds. The witness also gave a description of the shooter’s car and told Bennett about the white Jeep that dropped the shooter off in front of Crox. {¶ 15} The State played Bennett’s body camera footage for the court. It showed Bennett talking to a witness who heard a gunshot, then heard someone say, “I let one off, but I’m not satisfied,” followed by more gunshots. After the shooting, the witness saw a man get into a silver El Camino and drive off. After talking to a police officer, he went 5. back in his house. Later, he heard someone say, “I’m about to fuck these boys up.” He looked out his window after hearing that statement and saw a man walking down the street with an “AK.” The man got into a white Jeep. He rode in the Jeep until it was in front of the convenience store near Crox and then he got back out with his gun. He let off more shots after getting out of the Jeep. The witness also saw a police officer shoot at the man. When the shooter saw the officer, he jumped into the Jeep and took off. The witness said the shooter was wearing a gray beanie, a gray hoodie, and black jeans. He also said that the shooter hit a truck when he was shooting the first time. {¶ 16} Officers found the El Camino the witness described near the scene. Bennett saw the suspect being taken into custody. He was wearing a gray sweatshirt, gray beanie, and black jeans. {¶ 17} On cross-examination, Bennett said that he normally patrolled in the area of Crox, and shootings regularly happened in that area. Bennett did not see Thomas shoot a gun that night. He did not know how many shell casings he found or recall whether all of the casings were spent. {¶ 18} On redirect, Bennett said that he had not responded to Crox for a shooting since November 17, 2024, and was not aware of any other shootings that had happened at the bar since then. {¶ 19} Sergeant Tyrus McAtee of the TPD testified that he responded to the scene of the shooting outside of Crox. He saw shell casings while he was on scene. After securing the scene and talking to a witness with Bennett, he left the scene. While he was driving, he saw a car that matched the description of the one the suspect was driving, so 6. he stopped the car. He identified the driver as Thomas, who was taken into custody without incident. {¶ 20} The State played McAtee’s body camera footage. In it, McAtee and other officers arrest Thomas, who was driving a silver El Camino. {¶ 21} Detective Carl Schwirzinski of the TPD testified that his job is to monitor pole and trailer cameras in the city of Toledo. Sergeant Roy Kennedy, the lead detective on the case, asked him to download footage from a pole camera at Arlington and Woodsdale, which showed an area on Arlington near Toronto, including Crox. When he did so, he identified footage showing a person firing a rifle multiple times, both around 1:00 and 2:00 a.m. {¶ 22} The State played the footage for the court. Although the exhibit with Schwirzinski’s footage is in the record, the disc has a note attached to it that says, “corrupted” and “Needs Recovery,” and the disc does not appear to have any files on it. Thus, we were not able to review this video. {¶ 23} On cross-examination, Schwirzinski agreed that in one clip the gunfire appeared to strike the ground, indicating shots pointed downward. {¶ 24} Detective Leonard Beck of the TPD testified that he is responsible for locating and download surveillance videos around crime scenes. {¶ 25} At Kennedy’s request, Beck collected surveillance video from Crox and the convenience store near it. The State played these videos for the court. The videos from Crox show a man, later identified as Thomas, on the dance floor smoking a cigarette. A woman comes over and says something to Thomas before shoving his face. Thomas 7. responds by swinging at the woman, and he is then moved off the dance floor and out to the patio by a group of people. One of the people in the group lunges at and pushes Thomas. After moving out of view of the camera for a minute, the group goes back into the bar. Thomas follows them. About 15 minutes later, Thomas walks out of the bar into the back parking lot and drives off in a silver El Camino. About 30 minutes after that, a white Jeep pulls onto Arlington and parks down the street from Crox. Thomas gets out of the Jeep holding a rifle. The video shows a person run down a dead-end alley beside Crox when he sees Thomas with the gun. Thomas walks up to the alley, points his gun down the alley, and appears to fire. He also fires toward Crox before walking back to the Jeep, getting in, and driving off. At the same time that Thomas is shooting, video shows people on Crox’s patio reacting to something, moving away from the door, and ducking to take cover. {¶ 26} The videos from the convenience store show Thomas walking on the street with a rifle. Another video shows a person running from their truck into Crox, followed by a group of people leaving Crox. The final video shows a white Jeep pulling up in front of Crox, Thomas getting out with a rifle, and Thomas shooting down the street toward Crox, then shooting at the ground. After briefly walking out of the frame toward Crox, Thomas gets back into the Jeep, which drives away. {¶ 27} On cross, Beck agreed that the videos showed Thomas stepping from a vehicle on Arlington, firing several rounds at the ground, and then reentering the vehicle and leaving. 8.  {¶ 28} On redirect, Beck clarified he is not part of the crime scene unit and cannot opine on bullet trajectory or whether all shots were only into the ground. {¶ 29} Beck reaffirmed on recross that his answers reflected what he saw on the videos. {¶ 30} Mark lived on Arlington, a few houses down from Crox. He parked his black truck on the street in front of his house, facing Toronto. Early in the morning of November 17, 2024, Mark heard “[r]eally loud gunshots like they were right outside [his] window.” He went into a room at the front of his house, heard some more gunshots, and then went downstairs. When he got downstairs and looked out the front door, he saw an officer and someone else shooting at each other. Although he saw the officer, he did not see the other person who was shooting. The officer was shooting “directly away from” Mark’s truck. {¶ 31} After the shooting ended, Mark and some neighbors went outside to see what had happened. A neighbor pointed out to Mark that his truck had been struck by bullets. He found two bullet holes in the back of his truck. The bullet holes were not in his truck before November 17. A few days later, Mark’s truck was sideswiped and destroyed. {¶ 32} Mark and the neighbors also saw “five or six shells of rifle casings on the ground like an AR[,]” which they told the police about. {¶ 33} On cross-examination, Mark said that he was asleep when he heard the gunshots. He went to the front room of his house, looked out the window, went downstairs, heard more gunshots, waited until the shooting stopped, then stuck his head 9. out his front door. While he was looking out the door, he heard more gunshots. He saw the police officer who was shooting but did not see the other shooter. {¶ 34} Mark knew that the bullet holes in his truck were not caused by the police officer because “[t]he officer wasn’t there the first time the bullets were shot” and it would have been impossible for bullets to hit his truck the second time shots were fired. He also thought that it was not the officer because the shell casings he saw were for a rifle and the location of the casings “lines up perfectly with [his] truck.” When pressed by counsel, Mark admitted that he was not a bullet analyst. Mark also admitted that it was possible that someone had kicked the shell casings. The police never removed the bullets in his tailgate. {¶ 35} On redirect, Mark clarified that the officer was firing toward Crox, not anywhere near the truck’s tailgate. The first time Mark heard shots, they were from one gun. The second time, he heard more than one gun. Mark could “see where he was shooting down the sidewalk” based on the location of the shell casings and a ricochet mark on his neighbor’s privacy fence that was not there the day before the shooting. He also explained that he and the neighbors did not notice the shell casings until after the police showed up and cordoned off the area. {¶ 36} Sergeant Tyson Coates of the TPD responded to the scene of the shooting on November 17. While he was there, he was flagged down by a person whose vehicle was damaged by shots. The car was parked in a driveway with its passenger side facing Crox. The car had a hole in its front passenger window. There was also damage to a speaker on the driver’s door. 10.  {¶ 37} D.G. testified that he was acquainted with Thomas through family. On November 17, Thomas called D.G. and “told [D.G.] he had shot up a bar.” An hour later, Thomas called again, but D.G. did not answer. D.G. called Jordan Long, a detective, to tell him that Thomas had shot up a bar. {¶ 38} D.G. went to Crox. When he pulled up to the bar, Thomas jumped into his white Jeep. He immediately jumped back out of the car. After Thomas got out of the car, D.G. heard gunshots. D.G.’s Jeep was struck with gunfire, and he was nearly hit in the head. All of the shots were on D.G.’s side of the car. As D.G. was getting ready to pull away, Thomas jumped back in the car. When D.G. turned the corner, Thomas jumped out again and ran through the back of the bar. D.G. did not see a gun when Thomas was in the Jeep. After Thomas left, D.G. pulled over and waited for police to come because he “didn’t want to implicate [him]self[.]” {¶ 39} D.G. described Thomas as “[a]ngry. . . . real anxious, just moving too fast.” {¶ 40} On cross-examination, D.G. said that he ended up at Crox because he was “bar hunting.” He was leaving his house when Thomas called him the first time. He did not arrive at Crox until an hour later. {¶ 41} D.G. reiterated that Thomas had been in his car twice. The first time was “quick”; he was only in the car for a second or two while D.G. was in front of Crox trying to find a parking space. The second time was after some shooting happened, and Thomas was in the car long enough for D.G. to pull around the corner. They did not have any conversations while Thomas was in the Jeep, and D.G. eventually conceded that he 11. did not know why Thomas was shooting or have any basis for making conclusions about his demeanor. D.G. confirmed that he did not see Thomas with a gun. {¶ 42} Lamar, the owner of Crox, testified that Crox is a bar and grill that has a patio surrounded by a fence. The night of November 17, 2024, there was a shooting outside of the bar. {¶ 43} The night of the shooting, Lamar’s daughter was working at the bar. Lamar reviewed video from the Crox surveillance system that showed his daughter telling someone on the dance floor to stop smoking. {¶ 44} Following the shooting, Lamar found bullet holes through the fence, through a door, and in the bricks of the building, and found a cracked mirror near the patio door. The damage was not present before November 17, and there had not been any shootings at Crox since this one. He was sure that the business had not been hit by gunfire since November 17, 2024. {¶ 45} On cross, Lamar admitted that he did not see bullets striking anything in Crox or find any bullets near the damaged areas. He also said that he did not pay attention to what happened outside of his bar, so he was unaware if there were shootings a block away from Crox. {¶ 46} Lindsay Nelson Rausch of the Ohio Bureau of Criminal Investigation testified that she performed DNA analysis for this case. She tested swabs from the gun found in Robert’s yard and compared them to Thomas’s DNA profile. On the trigger of the gun, she found a single DNA profile consistent with Thomas. Robert was excluded as a contributor of the DNA on the trigger. On the grip of the gun, she found a mixture of 12. DNA with one major contributor. The major profile was consistent with Thomas. Robert was not the major contributor, and the remainder of the mixture contained DNA that was not of sufficient quality for comparison. On the front grip of the gun, she found a mixture of DNA with one major contributor. The major profile was consistent with Thomas. Robert was not the major contributor, and the remainder of the mixture contained DNA that was not of sufficient quality for comparison. {¶ 47} Sergeant Lori Renz of the TPD testified that she is part of the department’s crime scene investigation unit. She responded to the shooting to help process the scene. {¶ 48} Renz said that shell casings can be helpful because they indicate where the shooter was standing when firing the gun. Casings look different depending on the caliber of the gun; the caliber determines the diameter of the casing. {¶ 49} When she arrived at the scene, she found a set of .223 caliber shell casings by a telephone pole in front of the woodshop next to Crox. On the south side of Toronto and Arlington, she found a set of .40 caliber shell casings. She was told that the involved officer shot from that location. She found a second set of .223 caliber casings in front of the convenience store to the east of the woodshop. Finally, she found a third set of .223 caliber casings in front of the building on the corner of Geneva and Arlington. She collected a total of 23 .223 caliber casings, six from in front of the woodshop, five from in front of the convenience store, and 12 from the corner. The .223 caliber casings were consistent with the rounds a rifle would shoot. {¶ 50} In addition to the casings, Renz noted that there were bullet defects in a truck parked in front of a house on the north side of Arlington, the window of the 13. convenience store, the window of the woodshop, the fence around Crox’s patio, the bricks of Crox’s building, and a car in a driveway the next block over from Crox. Based on the angles, the bullet holes in the windows of the stores appeared to come from Yarnell’s gun and the defects in the patio fence were consistent with coming from where Thomas fired his gun. She did not notice any bullet strikes on the ground or find any bullet fragments indicative of a rifle round hitting the ground. The bullet defects in the truck appeared to be direct hits because they were nearly circular. Renz put a trajectory rod in one of the holes and found that the trajectory was from the back left of the truck and appeared to be a straight-on shot. {¶ 51} Renz did not find any projectiles other than some .40 caliber bullets in the woodshop and one on the street. She explained that it “can be” common to not find bullets because “[b]ullets do crazy things when they’re flying at the velocity that they are, and they strike different objects, they fragment. And a .223 round has a high velocity, which if it’s striking an object it could obliterate.” {¶ 52} On cross, Renz confirmed that she only recovered one or two projectiles from Yarnell’s weapon and said that it “can be” unusual to recover projectiles only from one weapon. Any bullet can fracture when it hits something. There was a difference between Yarnell’s gun and Thomas’s gun because they used different caliber bullets, so the diameter of the bullets was different, as was the range they were able to shoot. {¶ 53} Renz could not say for certain that the bullet defects she identified were, in fact, caused by a projectile. However, they were “[i]ndicative” of a bullet strike “based on its location, where [Thomas] was standing at the time the casings were left.” The 14. defects on the outside of Crox were “indicative and consistent with the alignment of [Thomas] and a potential projectile strike[.]” She could say that the defects were indicative of a bullet strike but could not say whether the defects resulted from a direct hit with a bullet or from ricochet. She also said that it was possible that two defects could come from one bullet. {¶ 54} Renz did not know what caliber round struck the truck, but the casings that were in the direction from which the bullet came were .223 caliber. She did not know if the larger bullet hole could have been from a .40 caliber round. {¶ 55} Aubrie Kranz, a criminalist in the TPD forensic lab, testified that she test- fired a Palmetto State Armory PA-15 5.56-millimeter rifle. She found that it was operational. {¶ 56} David Cogan, the laboratory administrator for the TPD forensic lab, testified that he was asked to compare some shell casings to each other and to a firearm. He examined three different groups of .223 caliber shell casings and found that they were all chambered in the same firearm at some point and were all chambered in the Palmetto State Armory PA-15 5.56-millimeter rifle that he examined. To reach that conclusion, he examined the casings’ class characteristics and individual characteristics. Class characteristics are “something like the caliber of the shell casing, or on a projectile the number of lands and grooves. Characteristics that could narrow down two shell casings, but not specifically identify them as coming from the same exact firearm.” Individual characteristics are “characteristics unique to a specific firearm that can impart themselves onto shell casings that we can use to determine that two shell casings were fired from one 15. and only same firearm.” In this case, the chambering marks on the casings were individual characteristics that allowed him to conclude that the casings were all chambered in and ejected from the same firearm, and that firearm was the Palmetto PA- 15. However, he could not say that the casings had never been chambered in another gun because he did not check for that. Cogan was not able to tell if all of the casings were fired from the same firearm because the casings lacked individual characteristics that he could use to determine what gun had fired them. {¶ 57} On cross-examination, Cogan said that “chambered” meant “when you load a live round into a rifle to fire it you can either fire it or not pull the trigger and unload it and the live round is ejected out of the gun. So that process, either firing it or not firing it and ejecting it out of the gun, may leave marks which we call chambering marks.” He confirmed that he could not say whether the casings were all fired from the same gun because they lacked individual characteristics relative to firing. {¶ 58} Detective Duane Isabell of the TPD testified that he performed a cellphone extraction of a phone belonging to D.G. He attempted to extract a second phone belonging to Thomas but had not successfully done so by the time of trial. He explained that the TPD’s extraction tool was still trying to break the passcode on the second phone. {¶ 59} Detective Jeffrey Sharp of the TPD testified that he is a member of the FBI’s cellular analysis survey team. He explained that cellular providers keep records of every time a phone makes or receives a call, sends or receives a text, or uses data. The records include cell site location information, which is the tower and side of the tower, or sector, that serviced the interaction. The call detail records show which interactions were 16. made at a particular time, and Sharp can match those interactions with the tower they used to give an approximate area where the device was when it was interacting with the network. He noted that his analysis is only able to give the approximate location of the device, not the location of a suspect or an exact location of the device. {¶ 60} Cellphones communicate using radio frequencies. A cellphone is constantly scanning for the clearest signal to use, which would generally be from the nearest tower. That is not always the case, however, because the towers provide overlapping coverage. {¶ 61} In this case, Sharp analyzed the location data from a phone with a number ending in 7051 from November 17, 2024, from approximately midnight to 4:00 a.m. From 12:00 to 12:07 a.m., the phone used a tower that placed it in the general area of an address on Prouty Street in Toledo. From 12:33 to 12:47 a.m., the phone used a tower that placed it in the general area of Crox. At 12:43 a.m., the phone made a voice call to a number ending in 7914, which was identified at D.G.’s phone number. From 12:49 to 12:53 a.m., the phone used two different sectors of the same tower that placed it more in the direction of Prouty than of Crox. From 1:02 to 1:57 a.m., the phone first used a tower that placed it in the general area of Crox. It used that tower at 1:02 and 1:10 a.m. Beginning at 1:16 a.m., the phone used two different sectors of the same tower that placed it more in the direction of Prouty than Crox. The phone’s movement over this time period was consistent with it moving from the area near Crox to an area near the Prouty address. Finally, from 2:12 to 2:54 a.m., the phone used four different towers. 17. Three of the towers, used from 2:12 to 2:25 a.m., surround the area of Crox. The phone made eight calls to D.G.’s phone number from 2:12 to 2:45 a.m. {¶ 62} On cross-examination, Sharp said that the distance of a phone from a tower is affected by the tower coverage in the area. A tower’s “dominant coverage” would probably be 50 to 70 percent of the distance to the next tower, with overlapping coverage at 20 percent. This was not a limitation on accuracy; it was simply the way the network was built. {¶ 63} Long, a special agent with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, testified that D.G., one of his confidential informants, called him on November 17, 2024, around 1:30 a.m. He called to inform Long that there was a shooting at a bar and that Thomas was the shooter. Long contacted TPD dispatch but was unable to confirm that a shooting had taken place because dispatch’s system was down. {¶ 64} D.G. called Long again later and told Long that he was in contact with Thomas and had been told to pick up Thomas. He called a third time, approximately 10 to 15 minutes after the first call, to tell Long that Thomas was getting into his vehicle. When D.G. made the third call, Long could hear another male voice in the background. He then heard multiple gunshots, so he hung up the phone and called TPD again. Eventually, Long received another call from D.G. during which he could hear police sirens in the background. He told D.G. to cooperate with the police. {¶ 65} Later, Kennedy called Long to try to corroborate D.G.’s statements. {¶ 66} Long knew that Thomas lived at an address on Prouty Street in Toledo and that he drove a silver El Camino. 18.  {¶ 67} On cross, Long said that he did not see Thomas at all on the evening of November 17 and did not see him shoot a weapon. {¶ 68} Sergeant Kennedy of the TPD testified that he was called in to investigate the shooting at Crox. On his way to the scene, he stopped at a traffic stop of a silver El Camino, where a male in a gray knit hat, gray hooded sweatshirt, and black pants was detained. He learned from the officers at the traffic stop that there had been two shootings at Crox, one of which involved Yarnell. {¶ 69} When he arrived at Crox, Kennedy saw .223 caliber rifle casings near the corner of Arlington and Geneva, more rifle casings near the convenience store and woodshop, and pistol casings on Toronto near where Yarnell fired his gun. There were 12 .223 casings at the corner, five in front of the convenience store, and six by the woodshop. He also saw the truck with two bullet defects in its tailgate parked in front of a house near Crox and the car with a bullet defect in its window in a driveway a block away from Crox. {¶ 70} As part of his investigation, Kennedy coordinated canvassing, reviewed video, had Thomas and D.G. transported to the police station for interviews, and looked for Thomas’s gun. D.G. consented to a phone download and provided Thomas’s phone number. Kennedy consulted Long and videos from the area to corroborate D.G.’s story. Thomas smelled of metabolized alcohol and marijuana when Kennedy saw him that morning. Kennedy did not find the gun, but Robert brought it to the police station later that day. 19.  {¶ 71} Later, Kennedy obtained and executed a warrant for Thomas’s DNA, submitted DNA swabs to BCI, executed a warrant of Thomas’s property bin from the jail to obtain his gray knit hat, submitted shell casings to the lab for comparison, attempted to contact witnesses, obtained cell tower records, and had the records analyzed. {¶ 72} Kennedy reviewed clips from videos that he obtained from Crox, the convenience store, and a TPD pole camera. The clips show Thomas in an altercation with a woman on the patio of Crox and being pushed outside by a group of people. Once he is outside, he makes “a lot of fast movements,” which indicated to Kennedy that he was “probably hyped up or agitated.” Thomas went back into the patio area, then came back outside “where he continued to appear to be upset . . . .” Thomas then leaves the front of Crox, walks to his car, and returns to the front of Crox with a rifle. At 1:11 a.m., the video shows him at the corner of Geneva and Arlington “pointing the rifle down the street and shooting multiple times.” At 2:14 a.m., the video shows a white Jeep arriving, Thomas getting into the Jeep, the Jeep stopping near the convenience store, and Thomas exiting the Jeep with a rifle. He then fires the gun down the street toward a man who was standing by the woodshop. In one of the clips, Kennedy could see bullets striking the Crox patio fence. The video also shows approximately 20 people on the patio at the time of the shooting, who all appear to react by running away from the wall where the bullet defects were and seeming to seek safety. {¶ 73} Kennedy photographed bullet defects in Crox’s rear patio fence and doorway. He pointed to one defect in the rear fence that he believed came from a rifle round fired from Arlington toward the alley beside Crox. He also pointed to a defect in 20. the fence on the side of Crox that showed what looked like a burn mark and appeared to enter “on a trajectory. Going from where Mr. Thomas was shooting it would be going right to left at a relatively flat but low angle.” He believed that this defect came from a rifle round. {¶ 74} Inside the bar, Kennedy found bullet defects in a mirror beside the door to the patio and in the handle of the door to the patio. On the patio, Kennedy pointed to what looked like two repair spots on the wall and one on the door, and a bullet defect on the inside of the patio fence. He also pointed out the reverse side of the defect from the side fence. {¶ 75} On cross-examination, Kennedy said that Thomas called D.G. at least seven times in quick succession the night of the shooting, and D.G. lied in his testimony. Kennedy could not tell what the people in the video from the front of Crox—in which he described Thomas as “animated”—were talking about. He said that Thomas was hugging people, shaking hands, and talking intimately with one man. There were no fights outside of the bar while Thomas was out there. {¶ 76} Kennedy admitted that he took the photographs of damage to Crox that the State used as exhibits “recently within the last week or two[,]” i.e., none of the photos were from the time of the shooting incident. He did not know when Crox’s owner made the repairs depicted in some of the photos. He maintained that two defects in the fence represented a single bullet path and disputed that the damage could have happened later. {¶ 77} Kennedy testified that it was common to not find projectiles from .223 caliber bullets. This is because those rounds are “very penetrative” and keep moving 21. after they hit something. Because of that fact, the projectile “loses so much energy at that point it can become—it can look like anything on the ground.” They did not find any .223 caliber projectiles or fragments in this case. However, based on the totality of the circumstances, including the video of Thomas shooting at the wall, dust flying up from the wall in the video, and Lamar’s claim that there was no damage to the wall before that night, Kennedy believed that the bullet defects in the wall came from Thomas’s gun. No one was struck by a projectile the night of the shooting. {¶ 78} In response to the court’s questions, Kennedy said that a projectile from a .223 caliber rifle can go up to two miles in the air and drops approximately 1.4 inches as it travels 100 yards. The car down the street from Crox that had bullet defects in its window and mirror was approximately 440 feet from the woodshop, which was within the distance that a high-velocity round could travel. He also thought that the angle of the defects in the car made it likely that they came from a bullet fired either from in front of the woodshop or in front of Crox. {¶ 79} On redirect, Kennedy said that it was “quite an endeavor” to get D.G. to testify and he believed that D.G. did not answer some questions because he was concerned about “being outed for the work with the ATF.” It appeared from the video that the man speaking to Thomas outside of Crox was attempting to calm him down. Thomas did the first shooting about 15 to 20 minutes after he was seen on the video talking to the older man. {¶ 80} Kennedy took photos of the bullet defects at Crox close to trial because he noticed additional defects that were not previously recorded when he went to Crox 22. shortly before trial. He confirmed Lamar’s testimony that there had not been any shootings at Crox since November 17, 2024. {¶ 81} Although no one was hit with any bullets the night of the shooting, Kennedy saw people in the direct line of Thomas’s fire on the videos. {¶ 82} Finally, on recross, Kennedy admitted that any projectiles that were in the tailgate of the black truck that was struck were not preserved as evidence. He explained that the truck would have been destroyed if they had chosen to remove any bullets in it. However, in hindsight, he wished that they had preserved those bullets. {¶ 83} Kennedy was aware of one shooting and one shots-fired call at Crox in the two years preceding this shooting but admitted that he would not have been aware of any shootings that were not reported or happened while the bar was closed. Although a detective took photos of the bullet defects at the time of the shooting, the State used Kennedy’s more recent photos as evidence. {¶ 84} After Kennedy testified, the State rested. {¶ 85} At the close of the State’s case, the trial court asked defense counsel, “would you like to make a Rule 29 motion, or do you want to preserve that for your closing arguments and the final determination?” Defense counsel responded, “I would reserve that, Your Honor.” The court replied, Because we are in a Bench trial I can indicate that the Court has, and you can tell by my questions and involvement, paying attention very closely, and so I will allow you to reserve prophylactically that the State had met its burden of production of the evidence to go forward beyond a Rule 29, and that’s what the decision would have been, but there is no reason to belabor it because I’m satisfied that we have had a pri