State v. Hale

Citations

• 2024 Ohio 1587

Syllabus

Aggravated murder murder felonious assault attempted felonious assault menacing by stalking Evid.R. 404(B) other-acts evidence severance joinder inferior offenses jury instructions aggravated assault voluntary manslaughter mitigating evidence sudden passion or fit of rage autopsy photos sufficiency and manifest weight. The trial court did not err when it denied Hale's motion to sever the menacing by stalking charge from the other charges because the evidence was simple and direct, and the state would have been able to present evidence of the other crimes at separate trials had it tried them separately. The other-acts evidence was relevant to a permissible purpose under Evid.R. 404(B)(2) and not unfairly prejudicial under Evid.R. 403(A). The trial court did not improperly allow the state to amend the indictment through its notice of intent to use other-acts evidence the state was permitted to present evidence of past events to establish a pattern of conduct and mental distress for menacing by stalking. Nor did the trial court err when it denied Hale's request for jury instructions on aggravated assault and voluntary manslaughter, inferior offenses of felonious assault, murder, and aggravated murder because (1) Hale's provocation was not caused by the victim, and (2) even if it was, Hale did not act with a sudden passion or fit of rage. The trial court also did not err when it admitted ten autopsy photos. Finally, the defendant's convictions were supported by sufficient evidence and not against the manifest weight of the evidence.