## Facts

- Scott A. Group, a deliveryman for Ohio Wine Imports, delivered to a bar owned by Robert and Sandra Lozier; his cash receipts were later found to be about $1,300 short, though he was not charged for that loss.
- In the weeks before the killing, Group sought access to the bar’s invoice copies and was seen at work with a revolver.
- On January 18, 1997, Group came to the bar office under the pretext of checking invoices; during a robbery he shot and killed Robert Lozier and seriously wounded Sandra Lozier.
- While jailed awaiting trial, Group was housed with Adam Perry and offered Perry $150,000 to firebomb the Loziers’ home to scare Sandra Lozier into not testifying and/or to divert the investigation.
- Group provided the Loziers’ address and instructions for making a firebomb, and represented that the house would be vacant; Perry went to the home but abandoned the plan after realizing someone was present and then reported the plan to prosecutors.
- A superseding indictment added counts for attempted aggravated murder (based on the firebombing plan) and intimidation of a witness under R.C. 2921.03(A).
- A jury convicted Group of aggravated murder (with capital specifications), aggravated robbery, attempted aggravated murder, witness intimidation, and related specifications, and recommended death; the trial court imposed a death sentence.

## Issues

1. Whether the evidence was sufficient to prove attempted aggravated murder, including whether Group’s conduct constituted a “substantial step” toward purposely causing Sandra Lozier’s death through the firebombing plan.
2. Whether the evidence was sufficient to convict Group of intimidation of a witness under R.C. 2921.03(A) based on soliciting violence to affect Sandra Lozier’s testimony or cooperation.
3. Whether alleged trial or penalty-phase errors required reversal, and whether the death sentence was appropriate and proportionate under Ohio’s capital-sentencing review.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Ohio affirmed all convictions and the death sentence.
- The court held the evidence was sufficient for attempted aggravated murder because Group’s detailed planning and inducement, provision of the victim’s address and instructions, and Perry’s actions toward executing the plan constituted a substantial step beyond mere preparation.
- The court held the evidence was sufficient for witness intimidation under R.C. 2921.03(A) because the firebombing plan was aimed at deterring or influencing a key witness through force or unlawful threat.
- The court rejected asserted trial and sentencing errors as not warranting reversal and independently concluded the aggravating circumstances outweighed mitigating factors beyond a reasonable doubt and that the death sentence was not disproportionate.

## Legal Principles

- Under Ohio attempt law, conduct may constitute a “substantial step” when it strongly corroborates the actor’s criminal purpose and goes beyond preparation; solicitation coupled with concrete planning steps and movement toward execution can satisfy this standard.
- A defendant may be convicted of attempted aggravated murder based on directing or inducing another person to carry out a lethal attack where the defendant supplies key information and instructions and the plan is set in motion, even if the intermediary ultimately desists.
- R.C. 2921.03(A) covers knowingly attempting to influence, intimidate, or hinder a witness in the discharge of duties by force or unlawful threat; arranging violent acts against a witness or the witness’s property to affect testimony supports conviction.
- In a capital direct appeal, the reviewing court must independently weigh aggravating circumstances against mitigating factors and conduct proportionality review before affirming a death sentence.

## Conclusion

The Supreme Court of Ohio upheld Group’s convictions and death sentence, holding that a planned firebombing to silence a witness supported both attempted aggravated murder (as a substantial step) and witness intimidation under R.C. 2921.03(A), and that capital-sentencing review justified affirmance.


State v. Group, 98 Ohio St. 3d 248 (Ohio 2002)