State v. Hamilton

Citations

• 2021 Ohio 1421

Syllabus

OVI — DUE PROCESS — COUNSEL — EVIDENCE —SUFFICIENCY — MANIFEST WEIGHT: Defendant's due-process rights were not violated by the law enforcement officer's failure to administer the field-sobriety tests within view of his cruiser camera because law enforcement has no duty to record field-sobriety tests during OVI investigations. Defendant failed to demonstrate that she received ineffective assistance of counsel where she could not show that she was prejudiced by counsel's failure to raise her due-process claim at trial or to play portions of the cruiser cameras videos that showed that the officer administered the field-sobriety tests in a location different than what he testified to at trial. Defendant's conviction for operating a vehicle while under the influence of alcohol was based upon sufficient evidence and was not against the manifest weight of the evidence where the officer testified that defendant smelled of alcohol and had bloodshot and glassy eyes, and defendant's performance on the field-sobriety tests indicated impairment.