State v. Hale

Citations

• 2024 Ohio 5579

Syllabus

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW/CRIMINAL – CONFRONTATION CLAUSE – SUFFICIENCY OF THE EVIDENCE – RAPE – GROSS SEXUAL IMPOSITION – DNA – EXPERT WITNESS – FORENSIC SCIENCE – SEXUAL ASSAULT – HEARSAY – HARMLESS ERROR – R.C. 2907.02 – R.C. 2907.05 – SIXTH AMENDMENT: Defendant's convictions for rape and gross sexual imposition were supported by sufficient evidence where the jury heard recordings of the victim's statements to a detective and a social worker detailing how defendant used force and threat to compel the victim into sexual contact, including cunnilingus, and where DNA evidence was consistent with her narrative. The trial court erred by permitting the State to introduce the reports and testimony of DNA analysts from the Bureau of Criminal Investigation (\BCI\) describing the procedures employed, precautions taken, and results obtained during the physical DNA-testing process, where the reports and testimony relied upon the notes and communications of other, non-testifying BCI analysts, and where those non-testifying analysts were not subject to cross-examination, in violation of the Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause.