State v. Hartley

Citations

• 2023 Ohio 158

Syllabus

Appellant's claims of prosecutorial misconduct lack merit because appellant failed to establish that the alleged inappropriate conduct by the State prejudiced him at trial. Appellant's claim that his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance during voir dire by failing to effectively challenge certain jurors lacks merit because whether and how to challenge a juror is a matter of trial strategy, which cannot form the basis of an ineffective assistance claim. Appellant's trial counsel was also not ineffective for failing to object to inappropriate comments made by the State during voir dire regarding the reasonable doubt standard of proof the comments at issue did not result in any prejudice to appellant given that the trial court subsequently provided jury instructions that properly explained reasonable doubt. Appellant's claim that the trial court abused its discretion by denying two of his challenges for cause during voir dire lacks merit the record indicates that the challenged jurors indicated that they could remain fair and impartial during trial. Appellant also failed to establish that his conviction for assault was against the manifest weight of the evidence. Judgment affirmed.