State v. Hardy

Citations

• 2024 Ohio 5926

Syllabus

Trial court did not err by admitting expert witness testimony, as appellant failed to demonstrate that the expert witnesses improperly bolstered the child victim's out-of-court statements and there was no Confrontation Clause issue because the child victim testified at trial and was subject to cross-examination. Appellant failed to demonstrate the evidence was insufficient to support the convictions or that the convictions were against the manifest weight of the evidence because the child victim's testimony was sufficient, if believed, to establish the elements of the charged offenses and appellant's alibi testimony did not outweigh the state's evidence. The trial court did not err by denying motions for mistrial based on alleged improper character evidence because appellant failed to demonstrate that a fair trial was no longer possible. The trial court did not err in its handling of remaining jurors after a juror was removed due to inability to remain impartial. Appellant's individual assignments of error lacked merit; therefore, he could not establish cumulative error.