## Facts

- Antwon Shannon was shot and killed during a bar fight at the Tavo Martini Lounge in Cleveland on February 19, 2012.
- Surveillance footage from multiple cameras, along with eyewitness, police, and forensic testimony, formed the central proof at trial.
- The conflict began after Robert Steel spilled champagne on Ivor Anderson; Steel later spoke with a group including Dajhon Walker, Derrell Shabazz, and Otis Johnson.
- Over the next several minutes, Steel’s group intermittently talked while repeatedly looking toward Anderson and Shannon.
- The video showed several individuals taking steps consistent with preparing for a fight (e.g., concealing bottles, removing glasses).
- Steel initiated the physical altercation by striking Anderson from behind with a champagne bottle; a chaotic melee followed.
- During the brawl, Walker hit Shannon and threw a bottle at him; Walker then moved briefly out of camera view behind a pillar.
- A muzzle flash and gunshot were captured on video audio/visuals, but the actual shooting occurred behind the pillar and was not directly recorded.
- Walker reappeared immediately after the flash, adjusting his waistband; Shannon was found shot in the back and later died.
- The firearm was not recovered; the state argued Walker was the shooter and acted with prior calculation and design, while Walker argued the evidence did not show advance planning to kill.

## Issues

1. Whether sufficient evidence supported aggravated murder under Ohio Rev. Code § 2903.01 by proving Walker acted with “prior calculation and design,” beyond proof of an intentional killing during a sudden bar fight.
2. Whether “purpose” to kill and “prior calculation and design” are distinct elements that must both be proven to sustain an aggravated-murder conviction.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Ohio affirmed the appellate court’s reversal of the aggravated-murder conviction.
- The court held the evidence was sufficient to support felony murder under Ohio Rev. Code § 2903.02(B) and related offenses.
- The court held the evidence was insufficient, as a matter of law, to prove the heightened element of “prior calculation and design” required for aggravated murder.
- The case was remanded for resentencing on the remaining counts without the aggravated-murder conviction.

## Legal Principles

- Aggravated murder under Ohio Rev. Code § 2903.01 requires proof of both (1) purpose to kill and (2) prior calculation and design; these are distinct elements.
- “Prior calculation and design” requires evidence of a formed plan or scheme to kill developed in advance, not merely readiness to fight or an intent formed in the moment.
- Preparatory acts consistent with anticipating a confrontation may support an inference of an impending fight but do not necessarily establish a preformed plan to commit a specific homicide.
- On sufficiency review, courts view evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, but must still determine whether a rational factfinder could find each essential element beyond a reasonable doubt.

## Conclusion

The court concluded that the evidence showed Walker knowingly killed Shannon during a rapidly escalating bar fight, supporting felony murder, but did not permit a rational finding beyond a reasonable doubt that the killing was preceded by “prior calculation and design,” requiring reversal of the aggravated-murder conviction and resentencing on the remaining offenses.


State v. Walker, 150 Ohio St. 3d 409, 82 N.E.3d 1124 (Ohio 2016)