COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA NO. 68254 STATE OF OHIO : : : : JOURNAL ENTRY Plaintiff-Appellee : : AND vs. : : OPINION DAVID J. PARNELL II : : : : Defendant-Appellant : : DATE OF ANNOUNCEMENT OF DECISION: AUGUST 24, 1995 CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: Criminal appeal from Common Pleas Court Case No. CR-310665 JUDGMENT: AFFIRMED. DATE OF JOURNALIZATION: APPEARANCES: For Plaintiff-Appellee: STEPHANIE TUBBS JONES Cuyahoga County Prosecutor MARK J. MAHONEY, Assistant The Justice Center 1200 Ontario Street Cleveland, Ohio 44113 For Defendant-Appellant: JAMES A. DRAPER, Cuyahoga County Public Defender JEAN M. GALLAGHER, Assistant 100 Lakeside Place 1200 West Third St., N.W. Cleveland, Ohio 44113 - 2 - O'DONNELL, J.: Appellant David J. Parnell, II, appeals the judgment of the trial court, sitting without a jury, finding him guilty of felonious assault in the shooting of Imad Abedrabo. The evidence revealed on April 19, 1994, approximately eleven o'clock in the evening, appellant pulled up to the Craven Food Deal grocery store located on Craven Avenue in Cleveland, Ohio, with a silver gun in hand and confronted Imad Abedrabo and Mustafa Douod outside the store concerning a $964.83 unpaid electric bill which Douod owed appellant. Adnan Sabla, a westbound motorist on Craven, observed five males standing in front of the store and stopped because he saw appellant holding a gun. One of the men then urged Sabla to call the police. Appellant continued arguing with Abedrabo and Douod, and as Abedrabo turned to walk away, appellant fired one shot which struck Abedrabo in the left thigh. Abedrabo and Douod met Sabla, who had telephoned police, at Chilly's Beverage Store, and all three decided to go to the Fourth District Police Station on Kinsman Avenue and 93rd. Officers Michael Connelly and Timothy Toler, responding to a radio broadcast of a black male threatening with a gun, encountered Abedrabo, Sabla, and Douod in the parking lot outside the police station and learned Abedrabo had been shot. - 3 - The officers directed Sabla to take Abedrabo to St. Luke's Hospital, and then took Douod to the Craven Food Deal to identify the individual who shot Abedrabo. Douod identified appellant and the officers then arrested him. The officers did not locate a weapon, but they did find a spent shell casing from a .25 caliber automatic weapon. At trial, appellant denied shooting Abedrabo or having a gun on April 19, 1994. Arafat Abdelhaq testified that he did not see appellant with a gun, and did not see appellant shoot Abedrabo. Yaser Abdelhaq testified as a character witness on behalf of appellant and stated that appellant is not a violent individual. The judge found appellant guilty of felonious assault with firearm and violence specifications, and on September 22, 1994, sentenced appellant to a term of three years actual incarceration on the gun specification, prior to and consecutive with a term of three to fifteen years for felonious assault. Appellant now appeals and presents one assignment of error for our review. I. THE CONVICTION IS AGAINST THE MANIFEST WEIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE WHEN THERE IS NO SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE TRIER OF FACT COULD REASONABLY CONCLUDE THAT THE ELEMENTS OF FELONIOUS ASSAULT HAD BEEN PROVEN BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. Appellant claims his conviction for felonious assault is against the manifest weight of the evidence because the State's - 4 - evidence did not prove the elements of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. The State believes the conviction is not against the manifest weight of the evidence because the evidence at trial proved each element of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. The issue presented for this court, then, is whether appellant's conviction is against the manifest weight of the evidence. The test to be applied in this instance is contained in State v. Martin (1983), 20 Ohio App.3d 172, where the headnote reads in part: 3. *** The court, reviewing the entire record, weighs the evidence and all reasonable inferences, considers the credibility of witnesses and determines whether in resolving conflicts in the evidence, 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. ***. In order to convict an individual of felonious assault, the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that appellant knowingly caused physical harm to another by means of a deadly weapon. Three witnesses in this case, Douod, Sabla, and the victim Abedrabo, all testified that the appellant shot Abedrabo with the .25 caliber automatic weapon. Appellant denied any involvement in the shooting and other defense witnesses testified favorably to appellant. Based on this testimony, the finder of fact resolved issues of witness demeanor, candor, credibility, and the weight to be given the evidence in accordance with - 5 - established case law. See State v. Grant (1993), 67 Ohio St.3d 465, 477; State v. DeHass (1967), 10 Ohio St.2d 230, paragraph one of the syllabus; State v. Chism (1993), 92 Ohio App.3d 317, 323. As such, the trier of fact is free to believe all, part, or none of the testimony of each witness who appears before it. See State v. Nichols (1993), 85 Ohio App.3d 65, 76. Since the trier of fact determines credibility, our review is to determine whether or not the fact finder "clearly lost its way and created a manifest miscarriage of justice." In this case, evidence supports the trial judge's conclusion that appellant shot Abedrabo once in the back of the leg with a .25 caliber automatic weapon. We cannot conclude that 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. Accordingly, this assignment of error is overruled and appellant's conviction is affirmed. Affirmed. - 6 - It is ordered that appellee recover of appellant its costs herein taxed. The Court finds there were reasonable grounds for this appeal. It is ordered that a special mandate issue out of this Court directing the Common Pleas Court to carry this judgment into execution. The defendant's conviction having been affirmed, any bail pending appeal is terminated. Case remanded to the trial court for execution of sentence. A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to Rule 27 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure. PATTON, C.J., and BLACKMON, J., CONCUR JUDGE TERRENCE O'DONNELL N.B. This entry is made pursuant to the third sentence of Rule 22(D), Ohio Rules of Appellate Procedure. This is an announce- ment of decision (see Rule 26). Ten (10) days from the date hereof, this document will be stamped to indicate journalization, .