State v. Elzey

Citations

• 2025 Ohio 5322

Syllabus

Appellant's conviction for aggravated menacing was supported by sufficient evidence and was not against the manifest weight of the evidence. The State's failure to disclose material impeachment evidence did not violate Brady or Crim.R. 16 where the impeachment evidence was discovered during trial and where counsel was given the opportunity to conduct a full cross-examination using the impeachment evidence. Appellant's right of allocution was not violated during his sentencing hearing and the trial court's decision to impose the maximum sentence for appellant's aggravated menacing offense was not an abuse of discretion. The trial court did not commit plain error by allowing appellant's sole defense witness to testify by writing down her answers to counsels' questions and having those answers read to the jury by an unsworn court bailiff. Appellant's trial counsel did not provide ineffective assistance by agreeing to have the witness questioned in this manner. Judgment affirmed.