State v. Contreras

Citations

• 2024 Ohio 5972

Syllabus

Zmuda, J., writing for the majority, affirms the judgment, finding no abuse of discretion by the trial court in determining the prosecutor was a necessary witness in the case for purposes of impeachment, as the prosecutor acted as an investigator in interviewing a new witness, that witness provided a statement that was key to the state's theory of the case, there was no other person who could testify regarding that interview of the witness, and the prosecutor put forth no argument of an exception to Prof.Cond.R. 3.7 that would have excepted the prosecutor from application of the Rule.