State v. Armstrong

Citations

• 2025 Ohio 2609

Syllabus

The trial court did not err by denying appellant's motion to dismiss his case or exclude video evidence where the State's failure to collect and preserve certain video evidence did not violate Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) or Crim.R. 16. The trial court also did not err by granting two motions in limine filed by the State to exclude evidence that was inadmissible on relevancy grounds. In that appellant entered a no contest plea, the trial court's ruling on a third motion in limine was not preserved for appellate review because it did not determine the admissibility of evidence with finality. Judgment affirmed.