State v. Eames
Eames
Citation
2025 Ohio 2177
Court
Ohio Court of Appeals
Decided
June 20, 2025
Jurisdiction
SA
Importance
45%
Case Summary
[Cite as State v. Eames, 2025-Ohio-2177.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT LUCAS COUNTY State of Ohio Court of Appeals No. L-24-1162 Appellee Trial Court No. CR 23 1007 v. Carissa Eames DECISION AND JUDGMENT Appellant Decided: June 20, 2025 ***** Julia R. Bates, Lucas County Prosecuting Attorney, and Evy M. Jarrett, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. Laurel A. Kendall, for appellant. ***** OSOWIK, J. {¶ 1} This is an appeal from a July 2, 2024 judgment of the Lucas County Court of Common Pleas, sentencing appellant, Carissa Eames, to a total term of incarceration of 12 to 15 years, following appellant’s negotiated guilty pleas to two counts of complicity in the commission of felonious assault, in violation of R.C. 2923.03(A)(2) and 2903.11(A)(2), felonies of the second degree, and two counts of complicity in the commission of kidnapping, in violation of R.C. 2923.03(A)(2) and 2905.01(A)(3), also felonies of the second degree. {¶ 2} This case arises from the December 3, 2022 murder of victims K.W. and K.P., both juvenile males. On December 3, 2022, while K.W. and K.P. were playing video games in the basement of appellant’s Toledo home, they were assaulted, tied up with electrical cords, put into the trunk of a motor vehicle, taken to an abandoned home in North Toledo, and killed, after which the home was burned down, in a failed effort to conceal the above-described crimes. {¶ 3} For clarity on the confines of appellant’s role in these events, while appellant was not involved in the subsequent, off-site murder of the boys, appellant was present in her home when the victims were initially beaten and tied up, and later put into the trunk of a waiting vehicle, and driven away. {¶ 4} Appellant, by her own admission, was aware of what was occurring, heard it as it was occurring, did not intervene, did not seek assistance for the victims, did not report the incident, helped clean the blood evidence of the crimes, and later lied to the investigating law enforcement officers and to the victims’ families regarding what had occurred. {¶ 5} Accordingly, appellant’s convictions comprised complicity offenses for the offenses that occurred in her home, with her knowledge and assistance; namely, assault and kidnapping. For the reasons set forth below, this court affirms the judgment of the trial court. {¶ 6} Appellant, Carrissa Eames, sets forth the following sole assignment of error on appeal: “I. The trial court abused its discretion by failing to merge [the complicity to commit felonious assault and complicity to commit kidnapping offenses] pursuant to R.C. 2941.25, [as] allied offenses of similar import, [under] the facts and circumstances of this incident.” {¶ 7} The following undisputed facts are relevant to this appeal. On December 3, 2022, Corbin Gingrich (“Corbin”), appellant’s fiancé, arranged for an Uber to transport the victims from a party that they had been attending at Maumee Bay State Park to the Toledo home shared by appellant and Corbin. Corbin believed that the victims were involved in the recent theft of one of his firearms. The invitation and transportation of the victims to appellant’s home was a subterfuge. It facilitated their ambush, and culminated in their deaths. {¶ 8} Upon arrival at appellant’s home, the victims went into the basement and began to play video games. Subsequently, Corbin and Donald Eames (“Donald”), appellant’s brother, went into the basement and confronted the victims about Corbin’s missing gun. A struggle ensued, during which the victims were pistol whipped, subdued, and then tied up with electrical cords. Appellant was aware of what was occurring, and overheard it as it was occurring. {¶ 9} At this juncture, Cruz Garcia (“Cruz”) was contacted by the men to arrange to take the victims out of appellant’s home. Cruz drove to appellant’s home, accompanied by two other males, with all three men wearing face masks. Upon arrival, the victims were taken by the masked men from appellant’s home and put into the trunk of Cruz’s waiting vehicle. The victims were then driven away in the trunk of the vehicle, while appellant remained at her home. Again, appellant was aware of what was occurring, and overheard it as it was occurring. {¶ 10} The victims were taken to several additional locations in the Toledo area, and then ultimately driven to an abandoned home in North Toledo. The victims were strangled and beaten to death, after which the vacan
Case Details
Case Details
Legal case information
Status
Decided
Date Decided
June 20, 2025
Jurisdiction
SA
Court Type
federal
Legal Significance
Case importance metrics
Metadata
Additional information
Quick Actions
Case management tools
Case Summary
Summary of the key points and legal principles
[Cite as State v. Eames, 2025-Ohio-2177.]
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO
SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
LUCAS COUNTY
State of Ohio Court of Appeals No. L-24-1162
Appellee Trial Court No. CR 23 1007
v.
Carissa Eames DECISION AND JUDGMENT
Appellant Decided: June 20, 2025
*****
Julia R. Bates, Lucas County Prosecuting Attorney, and
Evy M. Jarrett, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.
Laurel A. Kendall, for appellant.
*****
OSOWIK, J.
{¶ 1} This is an appeal from a July 2, 2024 judgment of the Lucas County Court of
Common Pleas, sentencing appellant, Carissa Eames, to a total term of incarceration of
12 to 15 years, following appellant’s negotiated guilty pleas to two counts of complicity
in the commission of felonious assault, in violation of R.C. 2923.03(A)(2) and 2903.11(A)(2), felonies of the second degree, and two counts of complicity in the
commission of kidnapping, in violation of R.C. 2923.03(A)(2) and 2905.01(A)(3), also
felonies of the second degree.
{¶ 2} This case arises from the December 3, 2022 murder of victims K.W. and
K.P., both juvenile males. On December 3, 2022, while K.W. and K.P. were playing
video games in the basement of appellant’s Toledo home, they were assaulted, tied up
with electrical cords, put into the trunk of a motor vehicle, taken to an abandoned home
in North Toledo, and killed, after which the home was burned down, in a failed effort to
conceal the above-described crimes.
{¶ 3} For clarity on the confines of appellant’s role in these events, while appellant
was not involved in the subsequent, off-site murder of the boys, appellant was present in
her home when the victims were initially beaten and tied up, and later put into the trunk
of a waiting vehicle, and driven away.
{¶ 4} Appellant, by her own admission, was aware of what was occurring, heard it
as it was occurring, did not intervene, did not seek assistance for the victims, did not
report the incident, helped clean the blood evidence of the crimes, and later lied to the
investigating law enforcement officers and to the victims’ families regarding what had
occurred.
{¶ 5} Accordingly, appellant’s convictions comprised complicity offenses for the
offenses that occurred in her home, with her knowledge and assistance; namely, assault and kidnapping. For the reasons set forth below, this court affirms the judgment of the
trial court.
{¶ 6} Appellant, Carrissa Eames, sets forth the following sole assignment of error
on appeal:
“I. The trial court abused its discretion by failing to merge [the complicity to
commit felonious assault and complicity to commit kidnapping offenses] pursuant to
R.C. 2941.25, [as] allied offenses of similar import, [under] the facts and circumstances
of this incident.”
{¶ 7} The following undisputed facts are relevant to this appeal. On December 3,
2022, Corbin Gingrich (“Corbin”), appellant’s fiancé, arranged for an Uber to transport
the victims from a party that they had been attending at Maumee Bay State Park to the
Toledo home shared by appellant and Corbin. Corbin believed that the victims were
involved in the recent theft of one of his firearms. The invitation and transportation of
the victims to appellant’s home was a subterfuge. It facilitated their ambush, and
culminated in their deaths.
{¶ 8} Upon arrival at appellant’s home, the victims went into the basement and
began to play video games. Subsequently, Corbin and Donald Eames (“Donald”),
appellant’s brother, went into the basement and confronted the victims about Corbin’s
missing gun. A struggle ensued, during which the victims were pistol whipped, subdued,
and then tied up with electrical cords. Appellant was aware of what was occurring, and
overheard it as it was occurring. {¶ 9} At this juncture, Cruz Garcia (“Cruz”) was contacted by the men to arrange
to take the victims out of appellant’s home. Cruz drove to appellant’s home,
accompanied by two other males, with all three men wearing face masks. Upon arrival,
the victims were taken by the masked men from appellant’s home and put into the trunk
of Cruz’s waiting vehicle. The victims were then driven away in the trunk of the vehicle,
while appellant remained at her home. Again, appellant was aware of what was
occurring, and overheard it as it was occurring.
{¶ 10} The victims were taken to several additional locations in the Toledo area,
and then ultimately driven to an abandoned home in North Toledo. The victims were
strangled and beaten to death, after which the vacan
Case Information
Detailed case metadata and classifications
Court Proceedings
Document Details
Legal Classification
Judicial Panel
Similar Cases
Cases with similar legal principles and precedents
Case Details
Legal case information
Status
Decided
Date Decided
June 20, 2025
Jurisdiction
SA
Court Type
federal
Legal Significance
Case importance metrics
Metadata
Additional information
Quick Actions
Case management tools