State v. Carnegie

Citations

• 244 N.E.3d 178
• 2024 Ohio 1892

Syllabus

Evid.R. 803(4) Evid.R. 801(D)(2) Evid.R. 805 hearsay within hearsay abuse of discretion admissibility. Trial court abused its discretion where it failed to independently determine whether appellant's statement to victim, which victim relayed to a medical professional, was admissible under an applicable hearsay rule. The statement was not admissible under Evid.R. 803(4) nor was it admissible as an admission under Evid.R. 801(D)(2). The statement was the sole evidence introduced to establish an essential element of the offense accordingly, appellant was prejudiced by its admission such that the conviction must be reversed. Nevertheless, in a sufficiency analysis, the reviewing court looks at all the submitted evidence regardless of its admissibility. Here there was sufficient evidence presented as to each element of the offense accordingly, double jeopardy does not attach to bar retrial.