State v. Dalton

Citations

• 2019 Ohio 4364

Syllabus

The trial court did not commit error, plain or otherwise, by admitting into evidence at appellant's bench trial for retaliation a MonDay program screener's testimony that appellant, while awaiting sentencing for gross sexual imposition, threatened to kill the victim of that prior offense. The screener was not bound by confidentiality rules governing programs treating substance use disorder patients, and the trial court had discretion to determine that the screener's professional duty to report credible threats of harm constituted a valid exception to any confidentiality restriction that did exist. In addition, the trial court's determination that appellant was guilty of retaliation was not against the manifest weight of the evidence. The trial court did not err in concluding that the greater weight of the evidence proved beyond a reasonable doubt that appellant reasonably could have expected that the screener acting on behalf of the trial court would inform court personnel of his threats, and that the victim would be made aware of those threats. Judgment affirmed.