State v. Dobson

[Cite as State v. Dobson, 2026-Ohio-2929.] COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA STATE OF OHIO, : Plaintiff-Appellee, : No. 114967 v. : RONDELL DOBSON, : Defendant-Appellant. : JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION JUDGMENT: AFFIRMED RELEASED AND JOURNALIZED: July 30, 2026 Criminal Appeal from the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Case No. CR-24-697438-B Appearances: Michael C. O’Malley, Cuyahoga County Prosecuting Attorney and Andrew Boyko, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. Susan J. Moran, for appellant. MARY J. BOYLE, P.J.: Defendant-appellant Rondell Dobson (“Dobson”) appeals his convictions following a jury trial in the General Division of the Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court (“General Division”). He raises the following assignments of error for review: Assignment of Error I: The trial court erred when it determined that it lacked discretion to elect between one-year and three-year firearm specification sentences consistent with State v. Holliman, [2025-Ohio-1187 (8th Dist.)]. Assignment of Error II: The Juvenile Court erred when it found [Dobson’s] bindover to be mandatory rather than discretionary. Assignment of Error III: The Trial Court abused its discretion by denying [Dobson’s] request for reverse waiver/bindover. Assignment of Error IV: The Trial Court committed plain error in failing to instruct the jury that [Dobson’s] conviction for participating in a criminal gang activity required more than passive or nominal involvement. Assignment of Error V: The evidence in this case is legally insufficient to justify [Dobson’s] convictions, in violation of the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, and Article I, Section 10 of the Constitution of the State of Ohio. Assignment of Error VI: [Dobson’s] convictions are against the manifest weight of the evidence in violation of his right to due process as provided in the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution and Article 1, Section 16 of the Ohio Constitution. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm Dobson’s convictions. I. Facts and Procedural History A. Juvenile Court Proceedings On June 25, 2024, the State filed a 46-count delinquency complaint in the Juvenile Division of the Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court (“juvenile court”) against Dobson alleging the following crimes if committed by an adult: 1 count of participating in criminal gang activity, 13 counts of felonious assault, 3 counts of discharge of a firearm on or near prohibited premises, 3 counts of having weapons while under disability (“HWWUD”), 3 counts of aggravated robbery, 7 counts of robbery, 4 counts of improperly discharging a firearm at or into a habitation or a school safety zone, 4 counts of improper handling of a firearm in a motor vehicle, 3 counts of receiving stolen property, 1 count of failure to comply, and 1 count of possession of a dangerous ordnance. Nearly all the counts included firearm specifications. The charges related to multiple incidents occurring from January 1, 2024, through June 24, 2024. Two juveniles were charged as co- delinquents with Dobson. The State filed a motion to relinquish jurisdiction and notice of mandatory bindover to General Division requesting a probable cause hearing. On July 10, 2024, the juvenile court held a probable cause hearing. The State presented testimony from five detectives, as well as numerous exhibits. This evidence will be detailed in the discussion of the second assignment of error. After the hearing, the juvenile court found that Dobson was subject to a mandatory bindover to the General Division. It specifically held that Dobson was 16 years old at the time of the conduct charged and that there was probable cause for 39 of the 46 counts, including: 1 count of participating in criminal gang activity, 11 counts of felonious assault, 2 counts of discharge of a firearm on or near prohibited premises, 2 counts of HWWUD, 3 counts of aggravated robbery, 7 counts of robbery, 4 counts of improperly discharging a firearm at or into a habitation or a school safety zone, 4 counts of improper handling of a firearm in a motor vehicle, 3 counts of receiving stolen property, 1 count of failure to comply, and 1 count of possession of a dangerous ordnance, as well as all the attendant firearm specifications. B. General Division Proceedings On December 6, 2024, Dobson along with Nathan Parker (“Parker”), Lonney Jones, Arshawn Palmer, De’Auntez Crosby (“Crosby”), and William Hampton were charged in a 72-count indictment; 42 counts pertained to Dobson including: Count 1 — Participating in a Criminal Gang in violation of R.C. 2923.42(A), a felony of the second degree, with one- and three-year firearm specifications; Counts 23, 36, 40, 48, and 60 — HWWUD in violation of R.C. 2923.13(A)(2), a felony of the third degree, with weapon forfeitures; Counts 25, 52, and 56 — Aggravated Robbery in violation of R.C. 2911.01(A)(1), a felony of the first degree, with one- and three-year firearm specifications and weapon forfeitures; Counts 26, 53, and 57 — Robbery in violation of R.C. 2911.02(A)(1), a felony of the second degree, with one- and three-year firearm specifications and weapons forfeitures; Counts 27, 54 and 58 — Robbery in violation of R.C. 2911.02(A)(2), a felony of the second degree, with one- and three-year firearm specifications and weapon forfeitures; Counts 55 and 59 — Robbery in violation of R.C. 2911.02 (A)(3), a felony of the third degree, with one- and three-year firearm specifications and weapon forfeitures; Counts 28, 38, and 43 — Felonious Assault in violation of R.C. 2903.11(A)(1), a felony of the second degree, with one- and three-year firearm specifications and weapon forfeitures;  Counts 29, 30, 31, 32, 39, 44, 45, and 46 — Felonious Assault in violation of R.C. 2903.11(A)(2), a felony of the second degree, with one- and three-year firearm specifications and weapons forfeitures. Counts 33, 34, 35, and 47 — Improperly Discharging a Firearm at or into a Habitation or a School Safety Zone in violation of R.C. 2923.161(A)(1), a felony of the second degree, with one- and three-year firearm specifications and weapons forfeitures; Counts 37 and 42 — Discharge of Firearm on or Near Prohibited Premises in violation of R.C. 2923.162(A)(3), a felony of the first degree, with one-, three-, and five-year firearm specifications and weapons forfeitures; Counts 41, 51 and 65 — Improperly Handling Firearms in a Motor Vehicle in violation of R.C. 2923.16(B), a felony of the fourth degree; Counts 49, 50, and 62 — Receiving Stolen Property in violation of R.C. 2913.51(A), a felony of the fourth degree, with a one-year firearm specification; Count 61 — Failure to Comply with an Order or Signal of a Police Officer in violation of R.C. 2921.331(B), a felony of the third degree, with a one- year firearm specification; Count 68 — Unlawful Possession of Dangerous Ordnance in violation of R.C. 2923.17(A), a felony of the fifth degree, with one- and six-year firearm specifications. The charges alleged criminal activity occurring from January 1, 2024, through May 20, 2024, which included displaying firearms, gang signs, and symbols on social media, riding around in stolen vehicles, and using firearms in the commission of robberies and shootings. Prior to trial, three of Dobson’s co- defendants accepted plea agreements, while Dobson and Parker elected to proceed to a jury trial.1 Dobson waived a jury, and the HWWUD counts were tried to the bench. The State presented 32 witnesses and over 1000 exhibits. The following is a summary of the evidence adduced at trial that is pertinent to this appeal. Count 1 — Criminal Gang Activity — January-May 2024 Detective Michael Harrigan (“Det. Harrigan”) of the Cleveland Police Department’s Gang Impact Unit testified at trial as a criminal gang expert without objection by defense. He testified to his investigation of several gangs, which ultimately led to the discovery of a criminal organization known as “237.” According to Det. Harrigan, this gang consisted of a combination of several gangs, including Blitz gang, which is referred to as “27,” Check Gang which is referred to as “37,” and a gang referred to as “LTB” or “117.” (Tr. 1627-1630.) Det. Harrigan testified that 237-gang territory encompassed the areas near East 123rd Street and Locke Avenue and East 117th Street and St. Clair Avenue in Cleveland’s fifth police district, as well as Hough Avenue and East 59th Street in Cleveland’s third police district. Based on his investigation, he testified that 237 formed near the end of 2023 or early January 2024. Det. Harrigan testified that he identified several individuals through social media, including Dobson and the codefendants, who were involved with the 1 Nathan Parker’s convictions were affirmed by this court on June 11, 2026. See State v. Parker, 2026-Ohio-2178 (8th Dist.). 237 gang. These individuals commonly posted on social media together, engaged in group messages, and were observed interacting regularly by Det. Harrigan. He noted regular and recurrent use of emojis, specifically green hearts and snakes, and references to the number 237, which, based on his experience, indicated inclusion in the gang. Dobson was pictured in several of these posts. Det. Harrigan also identified multiple Instagram handles that he determined were owned and operated by members of 237. Two Instagram handles were associated with Dobson and identified as @Fr33dabros17 and @Hitdafully17. These accounts were involved in several group chats observed by Det. Harrigan, including an exchange from @Hitdafully17 wherein Dobson demanded an individual remove content claiming to be part of the 237 gang because he was not a member. Det. Harrigan also stated that Dobson’s nicknames are “Rondo” and “Ron Ron.” (Tr. 1658.) Det. Harrigan testified that the members of 237 also participated in shared music named “237 music” and a shared cash app account. The cash app account was linked to @Fr33dabros17. In addition to the online accounts, Det. Harrigan identified members through several photos and videos wherein members shared specific articles of clothing, including a black and white hooded sweatshirt with the word presidential over the top and the number 23 in the center (hereafter “23 sweatshirt”), as well as a black and white hooded sweatshirt with Benjamin Franklin depicted on the front (hereafter “Ben Franklin sweatshirt”).  During an Instagram live video, Dobson was observed wearing the 23 sweatshirt where he displayed a firearm. He was also wearing the 23 sweatshirt during a shooting that occurred at a basketball court. Parker was also observed in the same sweatshirt on several occasions, including when he and Dobson were arrested. Dobson was wearing the Ben Franklin sweatshirt on the day he was arrested. He also wore the Ben Franklin sweatshirt in several Instagram posts. Former gang member Nicholas McGee (“Nicholas”) testified for the State about his previous involvement and knowledge of 237. He described 237 as a group of teens that hang around each other, like a brotherhood. Nicholas was able to identify Dobson, Parker, and several other individuals as members of 237. He testified that he communicated daily with these individuals on social media and that they would use social media to obtain guns, clothing, and drugs and to participate in “clown opps.” (Tr. 1378.) Nicholas explained that “opps” are gangs who are in opposition to the 237 gang and “clown opps” is when rival gangs make fun of each other. Nicholas confirmed that 237 had disputes, referred to as “beefs,” with other gangs and would disrespect or “clown opps” with rival gangsthrough Instagram and social media. (Tr. 1377-1378.) Nicholas further testified that he knew Dobson his nickname was “Ron-Ron,” and @Fr33dabros17 was Dobson’s Instagram handle. (Tr.1369-1375.) The jury found Dobson guilty of Count 1, participating in a criminal gang and the attendant one- and three-year firearm specifications.  Count 23 — Instagram Live – April 13, 2024 Det. Harrigan testified that on April 13, 2024, while monitoring the Instagram Account @Hitdafully17, which was identified as one of Dobson’s accounts, Det. Harrigan observed a live Instagram video of Dobson, Parker, and two other gang members brandishing weapons, which were equipped with automatic conversion devices that allow semiautomatic weapons to be converted into automatic weapons with the flip of a switch. (State’s exhibit No. 2.) The conversion devices are also known as auto-sears or Glock “switches.” (Tr. 1731-1732.) Det. Harrigan testified that in the video, Dobson held the “Draco-style firearm with the red tape around the handgrip.” (Tr. 1711.) From the video, Det. Harrigan determined that Dobson and his friends were in the area of 2265 East 100th Street. Subsequently, on April 23, 2024, Det. Harrigan executed a search warrant on this property, recovering, among other things, eight firearms and several drum magazines that were similar to the drum magazines displayed in the Instagram Live video. (State’s exhibit No. 1002.) Dobson was found guilty of HWWUD by the trial court as it pertains to these actions. Counts 25-36 — Basketball Court Shooting — April 15, 2024 On April 15, 2024, there was a shooting between multiple individuals of the 237 gang and individuals from another group. This occurred during the day, in the area of the basketball court located at Magnet School on East 59th and Hough Avenue, with dozens of bystanders present. The shooting was captured on video surveillance. (State’s exhibit Nos. 471-472.) Det. Harrigan identified Dobson in the video of this incident as one of the people running, pointing a gun, and then tripping over Crosby. (Tr. 1753-1754; State’s exhibit Nos. 1 and 471.) He testified that “several individuals” were shooting during the incident. (Tr. 1755.) Dobson was wearing the 23 sweatshirt and admitted during an interview with detectives that he was present and had tripped over codefendant Crosby while running from the scene, which was also captured on video. Three homes were struck with bullets, and one bystander was struck in the leg by a bullet. Numerous shell casings were recovered throughout the basketball court and barbecue area. At the Crim.R. 29 motion hearing, the trial court granted said motion dismissing one count of aggravated robbery and two counts of robbery. Dobson was found not guilty by the jury of three counts of felonious assault concerning three John Does. Nevertheless, the jury returned a guilty verdict for two counts of felonious assault for the person shot in the leg and three counts of discharge into a habitation for the three homes struck by gunfire. The trial court returned a guilty verdict of one count of HWWUD. Counts 37-41 — East 77th and Superior — April 16, 2024 The next day, during a drug deal gone awry, an individual was shot in the ear. Video surveillance captured the shooting, which was in the area of East 77th and Superior Avenue. (State’s exhibit Nos. 547-548.) The video shows a Toyota 4Runner with a broken driver’s side rear window as the suspect vehicle. Det. Harrigan identified an individual in the surveillance video wearing the Ben Franklin sweatshirt who he believed to be Dobson because Det. Harrigan observed Dobson wearing the same sweatshirt throughout his investigation. Dobson was arrested on April 25, 2024, wearing the Ben Franklin sweatshirt. The jury returned not guilty verdicts for all counts associated with this event, including two counts of discharge of a firearm on or near prohibited premises, one count of felonious assault, one count of HWWUD, and one count of improper handling of a firearm in a motor vehicle. Counts 42-51 — Hecker Avenue and East 74th — April 24, 2024 Sometime in April 2024, the owner of a 2020 blue Kia Optima reported that her vehicle was stolen from her driveway. On April 24, 2024, while the owner was driving with her boyfriend and their toddler, they observed her stolen Optima with five occupants. The owner followed her blue Kia Optima, while calling police. The stolen blue Kia Optima stopped at 7304 Hecker Avenue. The owner stopped behind her blue Kia Optima, and a silver Kia stopped behind the owner, boxing her in between the two Kias. Several individuals exited the blue Kia Optima and fired multiple rounds into the vehicle that the owner was driving. Then the individuals in the silver Kia drove past the owner and fired rounds into the vehicle she was driving. The shooting was captured on video surveillance. (State’s exhibit No. 184.) The boyfriend was shot in the eye, which resulted in the complete loss of one eye. No other occupants were injured; however, a home on East 74th Street where Hecker Avenue dead ends was hit by bullets. Detectives recovered shell casings from the scene.  At the Crim.R. 29 hearing, the trial court granted said motion as to one count of discharge of a firearm at or near prohibited premises, four counts of felonious assault, one count of improper discharge of a firearm into a habitation, one count of HWWUD, and two counts of receiving stolen property. As it pertains to this shooting, the jury returned a guilty verdict on Count 51, improper handling of a firearm. Counts 52-68 — Aggravated Robbery of the Brothers and Crash — April 25, 2024 On April 25, 2024, two people who described themselves as brothers drove to the area of Wade Park to conduct a sale of marijuana with persons who arrived in a silver Kia Sportage. One person from the silver Kia exited the front passenger seat and brother one entered the silver Kia’s front passenger seat to conduct the sale while brother two remained in their vehicle. Upon entering the silver Kia, the people in the silver Kia pulled guns on brother one. Brother one described three guns, including a Glock 19 handgun with a drum magazine, a Glock 23 handgun with an extended magazine, as well as an automatic assault rifle pistol (“ARP”). Brother one testified that both Glock handguns had a conversion switch. The people in the silver Kia took several items from brother one, including marijuana and a phone. Brother two testified that he was lying in the backseat of their vehicle when an occupant of the silver Kia entered his vehicle and started searching it. The person wore a red jacket and mask and had an ARP. He then observed his brother exit the silver Kia and the driver of the silver Kia pointing two guns at him. Brother two moved to the driver’s seat of his vehicle and when brother one returned to the vehicle they chased after the silver Kia. However, they were able to flag down police in the area, who then chased the silver Kia. The brothers identified a photograph of the silver Kia Sportage involved. (State’s exhibit No. 980.) Cleveland Police Officer Robert Bjekic (“Officer Bjekic”) testified that he was working on both April 24 and 25, 2024. He responded to the shooting of the boyfriend and was aware of two suspect vehicles: a blue Kia Optima and silver Kia Sportage. The following day, while on patrol, Officer Bjekic encountered the silver Kia Sportage in the area of Wade Park. He was then flagged down by the two brothers who reported an aggravated robbery that had just occurred. The same silver Kia Sportage was identified as a suspect vehicle and was spotted by officers fleeing the area. Shortly after the silver Kia Sportage fled the robbery location, it was chased by members of the Cleveland police department. The silver Kia clipped a dump truck and crashed. The vehicle accident was captured on video surveillance, which also shows three people fleeing from the silver Kia. (State’s exhibit No. 981.) Dobson was arrested following a short foot pursuit. At the time, he was wearing the Ben Franklin sweatshirt that was pertinent to Det. Harrigan’s 237 gang investigation. Parker was also arrested after the crash. He was wearing the 23 sweatshirt. Three firearms were recovered. An ARP (long gun) was recovered from the silver Kia, and two Glock 23s with large drum magazines and gold Glock switches were recovered a short distance from the vehicle where they were discarded as the individuals fled. Cleveland Police Detective Daniel McCandless (“Det. McCandless”) testified that he observed the crash and three people fleeing from the vehicle. He also observed two Glock 23 handguns on St. Clair Avenue approximately five feet from the vehicle. (Tr. 1047.) The firearms were discarded when Dobson, Parker, and another person exited the silver Kia. Det. McCandless photographed and secured the Glock 23 handguns. He also observed a long gun (ARP) in the passenger side of the silver Kia. It is unclear from the evidence whether the fourth person in the silver Kia fled on foot from the scene of the robbery or exited the vehicle prior to the crash. DNA was collected from both Dobson and Parker, which was later matched to swabs taken from the Silver Kia Sportage and Blue Kia Optima connecting both of these individuals to the stolen vehicles. The two Glock 23 handguns contained serial numbers CAKT850 and CBPU905. The gun containing serial number CBPU905 matched shell casings recovered from the basketball court shooting, the shooting where an individual was hit in the ear, and the scene where boyfriend lost his eye. The gun containing serial number CAKT850 matched shell casings recovered from the shooting where the individual was shot in the ear. In addition, this same gun was displayed, with the serial number visible, by Dobson in one of his social media posts.  At the Crim.R. 29 motion hearing, the trial court dismissed Count 61, failure to comply. The jury returned guilty verdicts on all counts and the attendant one- and three-year firearm specifications related to this event, including two counts of aggravated robbery, six counts of robbery, and one count each of receiving stolen property, improper handling of a firearm in a motor vehicle, and possession of a dangerous ordnance. The trial court found Dobson guilty of HWWUD as it pertained to this event. Sentencing Immediately following the trial, the court proceeded to sentencing. Dobson was sentenced to 18 years in prison on the firearm specifications, to be served prior to and consecutive to a term of 3 years in prison for the underlying offenses, which were ordered to be served concurrently, for a total prison term of 21 years. In addition, he was sentenced to a mandatory minimum of 2 years up to a maximum of 5 years of postrelease control. Fines and court costs were waived, and Dobson received 302 days of jail-time credit. This appeal followed. For ease of discussion, the assignments of error will be addressed out of order. II. Law and Analysis A. Mandatory Transfer and Probable Cause In Dobson’s second assignment of error, he asserts that the juvenile court erred when it transferred Dobson’s case to adult court as a mandatory bindover because it was based on insufficient and hearsay evidence that he personally possessed a firearm during the offenses. He further alleges that complicity (being present or associated with others who had a firearm) is not enough for a mandatory bindover under Ohio law. The State counters that the bindover was mandatory pursuant to R.C. 2151.10(A), hearsay is admissible in juvenile bindover proceedings, and there was sufficient evidence demonstrating that probable cause existed to believe that Dobson committed the acts charged. “This court’s review of the juvenile court’s probable-cause determination involves questions of both law and fact. ‘[W]e defer to the trial court’s determinations regarding witness credibility, but we review de novo the legal conclusion whether the state presented sufficient evidence to demonstrate probable cause to believe that the juvenile committed the acts charged.’” In re J.W., 2026- Ohio-1972, ¶ 24 (8th Dist.), quoting In re A.J.S., 2008-Ohio-5307, ¶ 51. “As a general rule, juvenile courts have exclusive jurisdiction over children alleged to be delinquent for committing acts that would constitute a crime if committed by an adult.” In re J.W. at ¶ 18, citing In re M.P., 2010-Ohio-599, ¶ 11, citing R.C. 2151.23(A). “However, R.C. 2151.10 and 2151.12, in conjunction with Juv.R. 30, create a narrow exception to the general rule and provide for the mandatory or discretionary transfer of cases involving allegedly delinquent children to the adult criminal court under certain statutorily prescribed situations.” Id. R.C. 2152.10(A) sets forth which juvenile cases are subject to mandatory bindover and provides, in relevant part:  (A) A child who is alleged to be a delinquent child is eligible for mandatory transfer and shall be transferred as provided in section 2152.12 of the Revised Code in any of the following circumstances: ... (2) The child is charged with a category two offense, other than a violation of section 2905.01 of the Revised Code, the child was sixteen years of age or older at the time of the commission of the act charged, and either or both of the following apply: ... (b) The child is alleged to have had a firearm on or about the child’s person or under the child’s control while committing the act charged and to have displayed the firearm, brandished the firearm, indicated possession of the firearm, or used the firearm to facilitate the commission of the act charged. Therefore, “transfer of a juvenile to adult court is mandatory when three elements are met: (1) the juvenile is 16 years old at the time of the crime, (2) there is probable cause to believe the juvenile committed a category-two offense, and (3) there is probable cause to believe that the juvenile displayed, brandished, indicated possession, or used a firearm to commit the offense.” In re J.W. at ¶ 19 citing R.C. 2152.10(A)(2)(b). In this case, Dobson stipulated to his date of birth, thereby establishing that he was 16 years old at the time the alleged offenses were committed. (Juv. tr. 11.) Further, he was charged with three counts of aggravated robbery in violation of R.C. 2911.01(A) with one- and three-year firearm specifications. Aggravated robbery is a category-two offense. R.C. 2152.02(BB)(1). Finally, the complaint alleged that Dobson possessed a firearm during the commission of the offenses. Therefore, a mandatory-bindover proceeding was required under R.C. 2152.10(A)(2)(b). State v. Aalim, 2017-Ohio-2956, ¶ 13. “To establish probable cause in a bindover proceeding, the State must present credible evidence supporting each element of the alleged offense.” In re J.W. at ¶ 21, citing State v. Iacona, 93 Ohio St.3d 83, 93 (2001). “[P]robable cause exists when the facts and circumstances are sufficient to provide a reasonable belief that the accused has committed a crime.” State v. Martin, 2022-Ohio-4175, ¶ 17. “Probable cause requires ‘more than bare suspicion’”; “[t]he circumstances must demonstrate a ‘fair probability’ that a crime has been committed.” Id. at ¶ 18, quoting Brinegar v. United States, 338 U.S. 160, 175 (1949), and Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213, 238 (1983). Thus, probable cause requires “credible evidence that ‘raises more than a mere suspicion of guilt’” but does not require evidence of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. In re D.M., 2014-Ohio-3628, ¶ 10, quoting Iacona at id. “[T]he juvenile court’s role in a mandatory-bindover proceeding is that of a gatekeeper because it is ‘charged with evaluating whether sufficient credible evidence exists to warrant going forward with a prosecution on a charge that the legislature has determined triggers a mandatory transfer of jurisdiction to adult court.’” In re A.J.S., 2008-Ohio-5307, at ¶ 46, quoting In re A.J.S., 2007-Ohio-3216, ¶ 22 (10th Dist.). Accordingly, “the juvenile court’s role in the bindover hearing is that of a gatekeeper as opposed to the ultimate trier of fact.” In re A.J.S., 2008- Ohio-5307, at ¶ 31.  Further, “[a] probable-cause hearing is a preliminary, non- adjudicatory proceeding wherein the court’s function is not to determine guilt, but rather whether there is probable cause to believe the juvenile committed the alleged acts.” In re B.A.T., 2023-Ohio-3366, ¶ 24 (8th Dist.), citing In re J.R., 2021-Ohio- 2272, ¶ 37 (8th Dist.). “Because a probable-cause hearing is non-adjudicatory, the evidence presented at the hearing does not need to meet the same standards as those for admissibility at trial.” Id. citing id. at ¶ 37. In fact, this court has stated that “[c]onfrontation clause standards for the admissibility of evidence and the Ohio Rules of Evidence do not apply to probable-cause hearings.” In re J.R. at ¶ 37. With the foregoing law in mind, we review the evidence presented during the bindover hearing to determine whether the State presented sufficient credible evidence that Dobson participated in three aggravated robberies, including the alleged aggravated robbery at the basketball court on April 15, 2024, and the two alleged aggravated robberies of the brothers on April 25, 2024. Aggravated robbery under R.C. 2911.01(A) states that no person while attempting or committing a theft offense or in fleeing immediately after the attempt shall have a deadly weapon on or about the offender’s person or under his control and either display the weapon, brandish it, indicate that he possesses it, or use it. At the probable-cause hearing, the State offered testimony from five detectives, as well as multiple videos, photographs, and social media posts, to establish the elements of the alleged offenses. Each detective testified to their investigations, as well as a summary of each alleged victim’s statements. As stated previously, the Ohio Rules of Evidence do not apply to probable-cause hearings; therefore, hearsay evidence is admissible in a probable-cause hearing. As a result, the juvenile court did not err by relying on the detectives’ testimony, much of which was hearsay. As it pertains to the alleged aggravated robbery at the basketball court on April 15, 2024, Dobson argues that the State relied on hearsay evidence and that at best the evidence suggested that Dobson was complicit. We disagree. Det. Harrigan described the video evidence that captured the basketball court shooting. (Juv. tr. 117 and State’s Juv. exhibit No. 1.)2 The video depicts seven individuals walking onto the court. (Juv. tr. 117 and State’s Juv. exhibit No. 1.) All seven are wearing dark-colored hooded sweatshirts, except Crosby who is wearing a brown-colored hooded sweatshirt. (Juv. tr. 117.) All seven have their hoods up, and all seven have black masks covering half their faces. Det. Harrigan testified that during an interview with police, Dobson identified himself from a still photo taken from the video. (Juv. tr. 118.) Dobson is wearing the 23 sweatshirt, which he was also wearing in an Instagram live video two days early where he displayed a firearm. (Juv. tr. 98, 119.) Also, notable in the basketball court video are Dobson’s black shoes with red accents that are unique to him and identifiable through both angles of the videos. (State’s Juv. exhibit No. 1.) After a few minutes, the seven individuals leave 2 State’s Juv. exhibit No. 1 coincides with State’s exhibit Nos. 471 and 472, which depict both angles of the basketball court shooting. the court and approach a person. Parker is the first to pull his firearm out of the backpack that he is wearing on the front of him. (Juv. tr. 120.) Dobson can be observed pointing his gun at the person’s head as two others grabbed the person and appeared to be rifling through his pockets. (State’s Juv. exhibit No. 1.) Dobson closes the two-foot gap and puts the gun to the back of the person’s head. (State’s Juv. exhibit No. 1.) Someone starts shooting and gun fire is exchanged while everyone scatters. (Juv. tr. 120 and State’s Juv. exhibit No. 1.) As they flee the area, Dobson and Crosby trip over each other and they both fall to the ground next to the bleachers on the basketball court. (Juv. tr. 118 and State’s Juv. exhibit No. 1.) The video evidence clearly shows both Crosby and Dobson with guns, and Dobson can be seen pointing his weapon in the direction of several homes. (State’s Juv. exhibit No. 1.) Both Dobson and Crosby, along with a third person, appear to be firing their weapons. (State’s Juv. exhibit No. 1.) As stated previously, the trial court is tasked with determining whether there is probable cause to believe that Dobson displayed, brandished, indicated possession, or used a firearm to commit the offense. Probable cause does not require evidence of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt; rather it requires credible evidence that raises more than a mere suspicion of guilt. Based on the testimony of Det. Harrigan and State’s Juv. exhibit No. 1, we find that there was sufficient credible evidence that Dobson participated in the alleged aggravated robbery at the basketball court and was in possession of a firearm and used the firearm during the incident. Therefore, the juvenile court’s finding of probable cause as to the basketball court shooting was proper. As it pertains to the alleged aggravated robbery of the two brothers that occurred on April 25, 2024, Dobson argues that there is no evidence that he had a firearm. He contends that the evidence included inconsistent hearsay when Cleveland Police Detective Scott Carey (“Det. Carey”) testified that the brothers indicated that there were four individuals with guns involved in the robbery; however, only three individuals bailed from the vehicle and only three guns were recovered. Therefore, Dobson contends there is no evidence he had a firearm. Again, we disagree. Det. Carey testified that the brothers were contacted by an individual to purchase a quarter pound of marijuana. (Juv. tr. 59.) The parties met. There were four people in a silver Kia, one person exited the Kia and brother one entered the Kia to make the transaction. The person who exited the Kia entered the brother’s vehicle and started searching the car. (Juv. tr. 60.) He then pulled out a gun and pointed it at brother two. At the same time, the three people in the silver Kia, pointed guns at brother one and took the marijuana. The three fled and the brothers flagged down officers who were already watching for the silver Kia, which had been stolen the previous day. (Juv. tr. 60.) Video evidence captured the police chase and the silver Kia clipping a dump truck and crashing. (State’s Juv. exhibit No. 20.) One person, who was identified as Dobson, fell out of the silver Kia as it crashed. (Juv. tr. 64.) Dobson stood up and ran but was quickly caught by police. (Juv. tr. 63.) Two other people can be observed exiting the vehicle and fleeing. Parker was also caught at this time. Although a firearm was not recovered from Dobson’s person, three loaded firearms were recovered from the scene — one from the front passenger seat of the silver Kia, one fell out of the vehicle when the three fled, and one was located 15 feet from the vehicle. (Juv. tr. 77-78.) Additionally, Det. Harrigan testified that the shell casings that were recovered from the basketball court shooting matched one of the firearms recovered near the silver Kia. (Juv. tr. 136-137.) Again, the juvenile court is tasked with determining whether there is probable cause to believe that Dobson displayed, brandished, indicated possession, or used a firearm to commit the offense. Probable cause does not require evidence of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt; rather it requires credible evidence that raises more than a mere suspicion of guilt. Furthermore, the elements of an offense may be proven by direct or circumstantial evidence. State v. Wingfield, 2019-Ohio-1644, ¶ 51 (8th Dist.). Direct evidence exists when “a witness testifies about a matter within the witness’s personal knowledge such that the trier of fact is not required to draw an inference from the evidence to the proposition that it is offered to establish.” State v. Cassano, 2012-Ohio-4047, ¶ 13 (8th Dist.). Circumstantial evidence is evidence that requires “the drawing of inferences that are reasonably permitted by the evidence.” Id. Direct and circumstantial evidence are of equal evidentiary value. State v. Santiago, 2011-Ohio-1691, ¶ 12 (8th Dist.).  At the probable cause hearing, the detective testified that the brothers met with four people in a silver Kia to sell marijuana. Brother one stated that three people in the silver Kia pointed guns at his head. This happened while a fourth individual was pointing a gun at brother two and searching through the brothers’ vehicle. The silver Kia fled the scene with at least three people in the vehicle. The video evidence showed that when the silver Kia crashed, within minutes of the robbery, three people bailed from the vehicle and fled. Dobson was identified as one of the three people. And three firearms were recovered in and near the silver Kia. Although there was no direct testimony that Dobson had a gun, we find that there was sufficient credible, circumstantial evidence that Dobson was one of the people in the silver Kia who pointed a gun at brother one while they stole the marijuana from the brothers. Furthermore, there was sufficient, credible evidence that Dobson put a gun to the individual’s head at the basketball court while two others tried to take something from him. Because there was sufficient, credible evidence to conclude that Dobson committed three aggravated robberies with