State v. Cast

Citations

• 2022 Ohio 3967

Syllabus

The trial court did not err by admitting a toxicology report into evidence that showed appellant had a blood-alcohol level over twice the legal limit approximately one hour after an automobile collision between appellant and the victim occurred where the toxicology report was properly admissible into evidence pursuant to R.C. 4511.19(D)(1)(a) as the report was generated following a diagnostic, non-forensic blood test conducted and analyzed at the hospital where appellant was treated for the injuries he sustained in the crash. The trial court also did not err by admitting into evidence the event recorder data downloaded from both appellant's and the victim's airbag control modules where the data was properly authenticated under Evid.R. 901(A) and was not inadmissible hearsay under Evid.R. 802 given that such data does not consist of \statements\ made by a \person\ as contemplated by the Rules of Evidence. The trial court did error, however, by admitting appellant's medical records into evidence because the certification that was attached to the records was not \verified\ as required by R.C. 2317.422(A). But, although error, such error was harmless for the evidence contained in the medical records indicating appellant was suffering from acute alcoholic intoxication after having drank five or six beers prior to when the crash between he and the victim occurred was cumulative to the other evidence establishing appellant's intoxication at the time of the crash.