State v. Davis
Citations
- 2021 Ohio 1693
Syllabus
ABUSE OF DISCRETION – EVIDENCE – PHOTOGRAPHS – AGGRAVATED VEHICULAR HOMICIDE – SUFFICIENCY – WEIGHT OF EVIDENCE — COUNSEL – EXPERT TESTIMONY – CRIM.R. 16(K) – PROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT: The trial court did not abuse its discretion when it refused to accept defendant's stipulation that the automobile accident resulted in two deaths as sufficient proof of an essential element of the offense of aggravated vehicular homicide. The trial court did not abuse its discretion when it admitted three photographs of the extrication of the victims' bodies from the vehicle because the photographs were not gruesome. The trial court abused its discretion in admitting two repetitive, gruesome photographs depicting the injuries to the victim's body because only one should have been admitted, but the error was harmless. The trial court did not abuse its discretion when it admitted two photographs depicting the injuries to the bodies when the probative value of the gruesome photographs outweighed the danger of any prejudice because they aided the testimony of the coroner concerning the nature of the deaths. The trial court abused its discretion in admitting an extremely gruesome and repetitive photograph depicting the victim's brain matter because the photograph had no probative value and was not used by the coroner, but the error was harmless. The trial court did not abuse its discretion when it admitted a photograph depicting the victim's hand on the gear shift when the probative value of the photograph outweighed the danger of any prejudice because it aided the testimony of the officer concerning the instantaneous nature of the deaths. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the state, the convictions for aggravated vehicular homicide were supported by sufficient evidence and not against the weight of the evidence because a rational jury could have found that defendant's ingestion of drugs led to her heedless indifference to the risks associated with her ability to act and
Judges: Zayas
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
6 cases in this archive cite this case.
- State v. ThompsonOhio Court of Appeals· 2021-09-15· cited 9×
- State v. ClarkeOhio Court of Appeals· 2024-08-02· cited 4×
- State v. SnyderOhio Court of Appeals· 2025-09-24· cited 3×
- State v. SniderOhio Court of Appeals· 2022-12-12· cited 2×
- State v. SawyerOhio Court of Appeals· 2025-12-31· cited 2×
- State v. KirklandOhio Court of Appeals· 2026-02-20
Cites
17 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court· 1984-06-25· cited 123,578×
- State v. ThompkinsOhio Supreme Court· 1997-05-14· cited 16,183×
- State v. JenksOhio Supreme Court· 1991-07-31· cited 11,342×
- State v. SageOhio Supreme Court· 1987-07-08· cited 1,978×
- State v. MadrigalOhio Supreme Court· 2000-01-05· cited 1,280×
- State v. PerryOhio Supreme Court· 2004-02-11· cited 410×
- State v. MoralesOhio Supreme Court· 1987-09-02· cited 329×
- State v. SkatzesOhio Supreme Court· 2004-12-08· cited 294×
- State v. ColemanOhio Supreme Court· 1989-09-20· cited 203×
- State v. Mammone (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court· 2014-05-14· cited 186×
- State v. Boaston (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court· 2020-03-26· cited 72×
- State v. Froman (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court· 2020-09-24· cited 62×
- State v. Creech (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court· 2016-12-29· cited 60×
- State v. HallOhio Court of Appeals· 2019-07-24· cited 22×
- State v. BradyOhio Court of Appeals· 2014-12-26· cited 11×
- State v. McHenryOhio Court of Appeals· 2018-08-24· cited 9×
- Roy v. GrayOhio Court of Appeals· 2011-12-30· cited 4×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.