State v. Ford

Citations

• 2018 Ohio 2128

Syllabus

Batson challenge race-neutral reason clearly erroneous hearsay excited utterance Evid.R. 803(2) abuse of discretion ineffective assistance of counsel outcome clearly different Evid.R. 614(A) court's witness authenticity of voice on jail call Evid.R. 901. Judgment affirmed. The trial court's denials of defendant's Batson challenges were not clearly erroneous when the state articulated its race neutral reasons for striking the first prospective juror and the trial court expressed on the record its reasons for rejecting the Batson challenge. With regard to the second prospective juror, the concerns the court relied on represented a race neutral explanation, were based upon something other than the race of the juror, and the juror who replaced second prospective juror was another African American. The testimony by the witness of what one of the victims stated was admissible as an excited utterance. Defense counsel was not ineffective for stipulating to calling the victim as a court's witness and stipulating to the authenticity of the jail-cell calls.