State v. Brock

Citations

• 2019 Ohio 3195

Syllabus

The evidence presented at appellant's trial was sufficient to prove both proper venue and the force element of his burglary offense. Documents admitted at trial established the city and county in which the residence address identified by a prosecution witness was located, proving proper venue. The force element was established by the same witness's testimony that appellant pushed open a closed door in order to enter that witness's home. In addition, the record does not demonstrate that trial counsel provided constitutionally deficient representation. Counsel did not render ineffective assistance by failing to file a Crim.R. 29 motion on the basis of venue given the sufficiency of the evidence regarding proper venue. Counsel's prior representation of a key prosecution witness also did not amount to ineffective assistance where the record shows neither an actual conflict of interest nor that counsel's cross-examination of the former client changed the outcome of appellant's trial. Judgment affirmed.