Ohio Supreme Court Overturns Sentence Adding Six Years After Defendant Called Judge “Racist as F**k”

There is an interesting case out of Ohio where the state Supreme Court has ruled that Lake County Common Pleas Court Judge Eugene Lucci erred when he gave Manson Bryant, 35, an added six years after Bryant called him “racist as f**k.” The outburst followed his initial sentencing for robbery, kidnapping, and weapons charges relating to an armed burglary.

Sentenced in  March 2019, Bryant was respectful and remorseful before the court. He told Judge Lucci “I made a lifetime of bad decisions. And those bad decisions has caused pain to a lot of people in my family. For that, I am truly sorry.” He added that Lucci and the court staff had done a great job and that

“I have never gone through trial before. I have a newfound respect for the efforts of the attorneys, judges, jurors, and goal in living as an, as giving an accused person a opportunity to have a case heard. That’s all anyone can ask. I am thankful for the opportunity afforded by the court, by the day in court, and I respect the decision that the juries has made.”

He pleaded with Lucci that he could “still make something” out of his life and that “I don’t want to die in prison, sir. I’m not a bad person, sir. I do have a drug problem. I’ve been in front of you multiple times. I respect you. And I respect your decision that you make today.”

The statement did not appear to sway Lucci, however, who hit Bryant with a heavy 22 year sentence despite his co-defendant receiving just 12 years.

That is when things went from bad to worse.

Here is the exchange that followed:

BRYANT: Fuck your courtroom, you racist ass bitch. Fuck your courtroom, man. You racist as fuck. You racist as fuck. Twenty-two fucking years. Racist ass bitch. (CONTINUED OUTBURST BY DEFENDANT, SWEARING, YELLING, MUCH UNINTELLIGIBLE).

COURT: Remember when—

BRYANT: You ain’t shit.

COURT: Remember when I said that you had some remorse?

BRYANT: You ain’t shit. You never gave me probation.

COURT: Wait a minute.

BRYANT: You never gave me a chance.

COURT: When I said that you had a certain amount of remorse, I was mistaken. (DEFENDANT CONTINUES YELLING). The Court determines—

BRYANT: Fuck you.

COURT: The Court determines that maximum imprisonment is needed, so it’s eleven years on Count 1 and eleven years on Count 3.

BRYANT: Fuck that courtroom. You racist bitch. You ain’t shit. (MALE VOICE SAYING “MANSON” REPEATEDLY). Let me out the courtroom, man. (MORE SHOUTING AND SWEARING).

COURT: So, it’s twenty-eight years with credit for two hundred and thirty-one days. Hold on. (DEFENDANT STILL SHOUTING). Does counsel waive your client’s presence for the remainder of the advisements I have to give?


COURT: Alright. You can take him. The Court determines that [Bryant] has shown no remorse whatsoever. I was giving him remorse, a certain amount of remorse in mitigation of the sentence. [Bryant] has shown me that he has no remorse whatsoever, and therefore the Court determines that maximum imprisonment is needed.

Lucci tacked on six years for a total of 28 years. That sentence was upheld by an appellate court but the Ohio Supreme Court reversed in a 4-3 opinion. The court found that under Ohio law disrespect for the Court is not grounds for an enhancement. While Lucci characterized the comments as showing a lack of remorse, the court found it was an attack on the court itself.

Justice Melody Stewart found that “there is no disputing the fact that Bryant’s words and statements were directed solely at the trial-court judge who had just sentenced Bryant to 22 years in prison after having sentenced his codefendant to 12 years in prison for the same criminal acts.”

She added that “If a defendant’s outburst or other courtroom misbehavior causes a significant disruption that obstructs the administration of justice, that behavior may be punishable as contempt of court. The behavior, however, may not result in an increased sentence for the underlying crime.”

Justice Sharon Kennedy disagreed and wrote that “The trial court is permitted to consider that in-court outburst in sentencing: here, the in-court outburst directly related to whether appellant, Manson Bryant, had displayed genuine remorse for committing various crimes or whether he was just pretending to have remorse with the hope of receiving a more lenient sentence. And under this court’s [precedent], neither this court nor the court of appeals has the authority to review Bryant’s increased sentence.”

Without getting into the confines of Ohio law, the additional time in my view was excessive. It was added to an already hefty sentence. This does seem to me to be an act of contempt and could be punished on that ground.

Notably, Bryant won this case pro se, or representing himself. It is a considerable win for a self-represented individual.

Here is the decision: Ohio v. Bryant

51 thoughts on “Ohio Supreme Court Overturns Sentence Adding Six Years After Defendant Called Judge “Racist as F**k””

  1. I feel sort of sorry for the defense counsel. I can’t even begin to imagine

  2. Robbery? Kidnapping? Use of a gun in commission of a felony? He’s a serial violent felon. As in many. As in doesn’t care about human life or property. As in complete, unmitigated narcissism. In saner times, he’d be locked up and the key sealed in concrete or meet his end with Mr. Sparky. Instead, we get to pay for this miscreant as he winds his way through the judicial system on our dime and with no remorse filing habeas after habeas alleging unsharp pencils at counsel table or water decanter only half-full or other such nonsense to vent his rage at society for venting its justice on him. His outburst wasn’t against the trial judge; it was against justice itself and an enhancement wasn’t merely justified it was mandated by the circumstances. Alas, we live in a feminized sosiety where appellate judges have to justify punishment. Mercy is fine but you need to understand that in extending it at justice’s expense you undermine societal standards. Giving in to this ingrate should have forced a recall for the tender-hearted and tender-headed justices in the majority.

    1. Apropos of nothing:

      “Yellow Mama is the electric chair of the U.S. state of Alabama. It was used for executions from 1927 to 2002.”

      – Wiki

  3. If I had been the judge I would have given him the death penalty. It would have solved his drug problems and our ability to be free of this trash.

    1. it won’t since he was not convicted….a conviction had potential to be reversed if something was odd…but even then I doubt a case of that type would ever got to SCOTUS

    1. So the others, who received lower sentences, pled guilty. Bryant went to trial. My guess is that those who plead guilty generally get lower sentences than those who are found guilty after a trial. This would be especially true if the guilty plea is part of a plea bargain.

  4. Yes, the Judge erred when he did not stop the totally over-the-top out of control defendant for Contempt..no brainer… HOWEVER, both the kind & degree of disrespect shown to the Court by this repeat criminal – also via the ‘it must be racist if you’re white’ ammo- is the stuff that is starting to destroy the fabric of our country and our legal system. What seems to be lost here is that there are precedents of protocol that apply to every environment, whether it’s Corporate, Judicial, etc., that must be followed. and respected, Changes must be massaged into the system.. ..so why didn’t the defense counsel prepare his client…?

    1. The Naturalization Act of 1802 was in full force and effect in 1863 and must have been enforced.

      Naturalization Acts of 1790, 1795, 1798 and 1802 (four iterations, they meant it)

      United States Congress, “An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization,” March 26, 1790

      Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That any Alien being a free white person, who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years, may be admitted to become a citizen thereof…

      1. To the extent that the Naturalization Acts and Dred Scott limited the ability of free blacks to be recognized as US citizens, the adoption of the 14th amendment overturned those legal limitations.

        1. What do you propose to correct the collapse of the nation that the 14th & 17th helped cause?

          Oh So Sorry, I forgot, we’re not allowed to discuses what happens when we allow people who’s IQ’s are so low that the US Military won’t take them.

          I heard last night it’s reported of 25% of Central America are already in the US.

  5. He played the race card. The leader of BLM declared that she is a committed Marxist. Here is a piece of thought expressed by Carl Marx. Karl Marx himself called for “a revolution that cares as little about the human lives it destroys as an earthquake cares about the houses it ravages.” He and Friedrich Engels wrote that “the bloody birth throes of the new society can be shortened, simplified, and concentrated [only through] revolutionary terror. Such a hero.

  6. Jonathan: On another topic, Trump falsely claimed there was “massive voter fraud” by the Dems in Michigan’s 2020 election. Now there are a number of GOP candidates who want to run against Dem. Gov. Gretchen Whitmer. Perry Johnson was one of those. He spent a lot of his own money trying to get on the ballot. But Johnson was among 5 GOP candidates who were deemed ineligible because they fell short of collecting the required number of valid voter signatures. In fact, the elections bureau found that the GOP candidates submitted fake signatures collected by paid petition circulators. Johnson went to federal court to try to get an injunction so he could get on the primary ballot. A US District Court judge ruled Johnson was not unconstitutionally left off the ballot. Ryan Kelley, another GOP candidate, is facing a more serious problem. He was just arrested and charged with participating in the Jan. 6 insurrection.

    It seems the GOP is having a hard time finding viable candidates for office in November. The GOP and Trump’s choices are either engaging in their own “voter fraud”, participated in the assault on the Capitol or still subscribe to the “Big Lie”. The chickens, indeed, have come home to roost!

    1. Michigan: we could not find fraud, after we eliminated fraud detection capabilities

      Michigan verifies ballot using signatures.

      The progressive secretary of state issued a diktat for the 2020 election that all signatures must be presumed valid. That diktat was illegal.


      If you presume signatures to be valid, and verify ballots by signature, can you find fraudulent ballots?

      I know that is over the head of progressives, but everyone else realizes the claim of “no fraud” is ridiculous

      1. Emphasis on PROGRESSIVE Secretary of State — when one puts this woman under a microscope, much that the media hides or chooses to ignore is revealed.

      2. While I agree with you – to a large extent it does not matter.

        Those on the left do not seem to beleive that anyone would ever commit election fraud.

        That we can conduct elections most anyway and there will be no fraud.

        History tells us otherwise.

        The failure to follow election laws in 2020 was one major problem.
        The left seems to think that election laws have no reasonable basis.

        But the failure to secure the election – regardless of laws is another major failure.

        We follow the law in the hope the law is good enough to prevent significant fraud.
        But the goal is a trustworthy election.
        If we do not have that – whether the law is followed or not government is not legitimate and a REAL insurrection is likely. \

        Democrats seem to think we should return to pre filled out ballots handed out by political bosses as we had in the 19th century.

    2. Dennis,

      Turley might also have wrote an article noting that:

      “Rudy Giuliani charged with ethical misconduct over Trump’s big lie”


      “The charges say his conduct violated two professional conduct rules in Pennsylvania that bar attorneys from bringing frivolous proceedings without a basis in law or fact and prohibit conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice.

      Charges can lead to the suspension of a license to practice law or disbarment.

      The charges mark the second time that a bar office has taken action against Giuliani.
      His New York law license was suspended in June 2021 after a state appeals court found that he made “demonstrably false and misleading” statements that widespread voter fraud undermined the election.”

      Turley would have his readers believe that Trump’s lawyers acted in good faith when they challenged the election. Turley often makes a false equivalence to Democrats who questioned election results. But impartial judges do not agree with Turley that these Trumpist lawyers acted in good faith.

      It is imperative that Turley deny that the lawyers who appeared on Fox were pushing “demonstrably false and misleading statements that widespread voter fraud undermined the election.” If that is true, then Fox’s defense against Dominion and Smartmatic defamation lawsuits will be undermined. How can Fox claim that it had no reason to suspect that these election claims were false when courts have found that they were DEMONSTRABLY false, that is, clearly apparent?

      For this reason, Turley maintains the pretense that there was no Big Lie. Just a good faith effort by Giuliani and company as well as John Eastman to challenge the election. Turley has stated that he did not agree with these lawyers, but he has never acknowledged that they were lying and/or acting in BAD FAITH.

      1. JS – every single year in PA numerous election officials are convicted of significant election fraud in Philadelphia.

        ANY claim of election fraud in PA is INHERENTLY not frivolous.

        All the Bar is doing is proving itself politically biased idiots.

        “A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 77% of those Likely U.S. voters who have seen “2000 Mules” say the movie strengthened their conviction that there was systematic and widespread election fraud in the 2020 election. Only 19% of those who have seen the documentary say their belief in election fraud was weakened.”

        77% of people could be wrong. But they are not frivolous.

    3. What you left off. The company hired by the Republicans to gather signatures have run afoul the law before. The company is a leftist outfit. Seems the Republican failed to perform due diligence, got suckered into hiring a company that hated Republicans. That’s on the Republicans.

      1. I suspect some partisanship by the courts – as these challenges are common and that is why most candidates get double the signatures required. The Courts ALWAYS find bogus signatures. They almost never find 50% bogus.

        That said – yes I expect the courts and Republicans to follow the rules.

        Just as I expect Democrats to. The 2022 elections in Michigan and elsewhere should be conducted like the 2018 election – except in those rare instances where laws have actually been changed. That means No mailin voting in almost all states – including michigan which has a Secret Ballot requirement in its state constitution – as do 38 states including ALL “swing states” except NV.

    4. With respect to republicans who did not meet the legal qualifications to run – so be it.

      We should follow the law. They are entitled to make their case in court, and they are entitled to impartial adjudications by the courts – which I am not entirely sure they got. Many of these candidates had TWICE or more the signatures needed. I would note that bogus signatures is a COMMON problem for both parties and has frequently cost democrats as well as republicans, and is especially concerning for voter registration as that is often done as badly – but we are not allowed – despite federal law requiring it to purge voters lists of bogus names. I am not sure how the courts remove candidates for bougus names but do not remove bogus names fromt he registration roles.

      With respect to Kelley – there was no insurrection. That is nonsense. Any judge barring anyone from the ballot over J6 must be impeached.

    5. If there was not massive voter fraud in MI then there should be no opposition to investigating allegations.

      TTV gas identifying data on several hundred ballot trafficers in Michigan. Lets pull their IMEI’s find their names bring them in for questioning.
      Lets issue warrants for the records of the 501C3’s that the frequented while engaged in ballot trafficking.

      If you continue to play osterich to all this – YOU are the problem.

    6. You seem to have missed the massive vote rigging and voting system disparity created by Zuckerburg and CTCL. An early voting site every 9 square miles for “Dem”, 1 every county (often near 1000 sq milles) for “Them” Republicans. Similar for drop boxes. Dem counties doing voter “outreach” while voting was underway, flyers sent to “Dem” along with “schedulers”. Wasn’t there also “mobiile voting” in Dem counties? There certainly were in other Zuckerburg rigged states..

  7. The stark contrast between the smooth, articulate apology and the unhinged verbal outburst clearly show that the lawyers wrote the first script hoping to get this kidnapper/robber off with a lighter sentence. When that scam didn’t work, the true inner criminal emerged. Playing the race card has become so ubiquitous in this country that it will soon elicit nothing but rolling eyes and yawns. The menagerie in Biden’s administration keep pushing out unconstitutional discriminatory orders, which are then challenged and overturned by the courts. All the while screaming “white supremacist” at any conservative who refuses to buy into their deceptive “systemic racism” narrative.

  8. Oh well, this guy is still going to get twenty two years. Good riddance to bad rubbish. Has anyone lowered the time spent in anxiety by his victims. How long will it take for those he damaged to stop seeing a possible attacker every time the wind blows the curtains or the refrigerator makes a strange noise. In his mind they deserve it because they are probably racist.

  9. Jonathan: Once again another post about a Black man sentenced for an armed robbery with his photo prominently displayed. Perhaps another attempt to focus only on Black crime? A racist trope? There is a much more important case playing out in Judge Carter’s courtroom.

    Last week Carter ordered John Eastman to turn over an additional 159 emails to the Jan. 6 Committee. Rather then just comply Eastman is back before Carter filing a motion called the “Clerical Mistakes; Oversights and Omissions”. Eastman claimed there were “discrepancies” in Judge Carter’s order and Eastman asked Carter to take time to review and correct them. Carter didn’t take the bait and ordered Eastman to turn over the emails by 3:00 pm yesterday. This is the latest attempt by Eastman to hide evidence of his plan to stage a coup to keep Trump in power. The latest delaying tactic is probably designed to prevent the Jan. 6 Committee from using the emails when Eastman is forced to testify. And probably one reason the Committee has postponed the next hearing.

    1. Jonathan: Once again another post about a Black man sentenced for an armed robbery with his photo prominently displayed. Perhaps another attempt to focus only on Black crime? A racist trope? There is a much more important case playing out in Judge Carter’s courtroom.

      No, there is not.

      In no way was Eastman staging a coup. Certainly he did not do what Michael Sussman and Kevin Clinesmith did.

    2. We’ll focus less on Black criminals, when Blacks stop committing so many crimes.

    3. Carter is a hack.

      Democrats are really stupid.

      You do not seem to grasp what is good for the goose is good for the gander.

      I honestly hope that the likely return of divided government in 2022 will put an end to most of this petty political BS.

      But I will not be even slightly surprised if vast numbers of republicans seek to do to democrats what the democrats have done to them.

      If you are unable to look at an issue – particularly a legal or constitutional issue and say – what if the politics were reversed ?

      What if an all hand appointed by republicans committee was using some political ruse to fricassee democrats ?

      You think the Eastman decisions are good – because they play into your narative.
      Nothing the courts force Eastman to expose will get you anywhere – you should have learned this by now.
      You spent the past 6 years investigating Republican navel lint and have only managed to catch yourselves in malfeasance.

      But these decisions and the choices of democrats WILL be important in the future.

      If executive priviledge no longer exists for Trump it no longer exists for any president.
      If it does attorney client priviledge does not exist for Trump – it does not exist for anyone.

      I am sure that whatever documents Eastman turns over will result in gasps from those ont he left such as yourself who actually think the J6 hearings have accomplished something – beyond exposing your own failure to follow the rule of law.

      But they will have no impact on most people.

  10. The appeals court decision is incomprehensible to me. They keep missing the point, in my opinion deliberately, because I don’t see how any intelligent person could genuinely miss it. The extra six years were not a punishment for the outburst; they had been reduced from the original sentence on the grounds that the defendant showed genuine remorse. The outburst proved that he did not feel that remorse at all; it is inconsistent with remorse. A remorseful defendant simply does not behave like that. On the contrary, it looks like the only reason he claimed remorse was some notion his lawyer had given him, that it might help him get probation instead of prison, and when he saw that it didn’t achieve that, but merely cut six years off the sentence he would otherwise have got, he angrily renounced it. In which case he clearly didn’t deserve that six-year discount and the trial judge was correct in removing it.

    1. No, the original sentence was 22 years. After he got upset the judge upped it to 28 years because of his outburst.

      “ Lucci tacked on six years for a total of 28 years.”

      What I want to know is why did Bryant’s co-defendant get 12 years for the exact same offense. That’s what set him off. Who was his co-defendant? Turley has zero links to who the other guy is. My guess is from Bryant”s outburst accusing the judge of being racist that the other defendant was white.

      1. Bryant had a long criminal as a record dating from his youth s as no was on probation when he committed the crime. Uncertain if the other had a similar record.

        Bryant went to trial and was found guilty of many offences. The other pled guilty, probably to lesser and fewer offenses pursuant to a plea bargain.

        See the linked article in one of the comments above.

        The judge said the 22 years reflected his belief that Bryant felt remorse. The outburst shattered the illusion and led the judge to add the six years he had cut off.

      2. Svelaz, did you bother reading the post? It says clearly that the original sentence included a six-year reduction for his remorse; that’s why it was only 22 years. Since the remorse was clearly fraudulent, the judge simply revoked that discount. How can anyone fail to see that? This was NOT a punishment for the outburst, and for the appeals court to proclaim that it was is simply dishonest. The majority are lying through their teeth, making things up that were not in evidence.

  11. “I made a lifetime of bad decisions. And those bad decisions has caused pain to a lot of people in my family. For that, I am truly sorry.”

    What about the innocent people he kidnapped and burgled? Same old same old, I committed the crime so you’re a racist.

    In the meantime the potted geranium tells AFL CIO how great things are since this administration has taken over. Like $5+ gasoline.

    1. Margot says:

      “Like $5+ gasoline.”

      Are you so broke that $5 gas is breaking the bank? Stop whining. It’s undignified.

      1. This is Jeff, the typical leftist. While Americans are saving pennies because inflation has cut their earnings, Jeff, who lives in Marin County, insults those people.

        “Are you so broke that $5 gas is breaking the bank? Stop whining. It’s undignified.”

        While Jeff saves money by using underpaid labor, likely illegal where he lives, he shows his intense dislike for those who work for a living and weren’t blessed with rich parents. That is who Jeff is. Listen to him fawn over Turley while at the next minute he insults him. That is not how normal people act.

        If you need to discuss your problems Jeff, I’ll meet you down the block at the park.

  12. The judge acted impulsively and should be disciplined for it. The early statement at sentencing shows an articulate and obviously intelligent defendant, why should he not get shot at rehabilitation?

    1. “I’ve been in front of you multiple times.”

      Seems like he’s had those chances already.

    2. mike hornbrook says:
      “The early statement at sentencing shows an articulate and obviously intelligent defendant”

      Yes he showed just how intelligent and articulate he was when addressing the judge after he was sentenced. Maybe next time he kidnaps someone he can intelligently articulate the state of the economy while holding them captive?

      1. He clearly didn’t write that tearful apology, but there’s no doubt about the words that came directly from his mouth.

  13. The left has turned racism, and the accompanying charges leveled at ANY opponent, into their first reliable tool; and they have made witless tools of their minority base to reliably employ such tactics. We are now saddled with generations of minorities who have been steeped in the misplaced understanding that all of this nation is against them and that ONLY the left can provide them with a life of free and un-earned benefits simply because of their minority status. Should anyone deny them of what they have been taught to believe is their just do, they are free to become an uncontrollable entity/horde that will thrash out like a wild and vicious animal caught in a trap.

  14. Well it is refreshing to hear about a court litigating a matter where somebody actually did something to somebody else.

    As opposed to some guy who gets busted because he a has a cartridge he doesn’t know is out of date and is therefore a “violent criminal”, or a couple of guys on a couch somewhere taking some cocaine or smoking some doobies who represent no threat to me whatsoever.

  15. This story is incomplete because it lacks any consideration of why the Judge originally sentenced Bryant to 22 years and his co-defendant to 12. I would assume there was some rational basis for this.

    In any event, the outburst does appear to show that he was feigning remorse and respect to get a lighter sentence. When he didn’t get it his mask fell off.

  16. Judges are exempt from law.

    Egregious decisions, turned over on appeal, have no deleterious effects on a Judges job performance reviews. They just keep judging.

Comments are closed.