Skip to main content

State v. Bright

Citations

  • 2024 Ohio 2803

Syllabus

Ineffective assistance plain error Crim.R. 52(B) expert testimony lay testimony Evid.R. 701 Evid.R. 702 Crim.R. 16(K) expert reports SANE nurse social worker DNA analyst competency of a witness Evid.R. 601 R.C. 2317.01 prosecutorial misconduct cumulative error sufficiency manifest weight life sentence nunc pro tunc. We conclude that Bright's defense counsel was not deficient, and that the trial court did not commit plain error. Further, his convictions were not against the sufficiency or manifest weight of the evidence. Therefore, Bright's convictions are affirmed. However, we remand the matter to the trial court to correct its sentencing entry nunc pro tunc.

Judges: Boyle

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

6 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

32 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.