State v. Herrington

Citations

• 2018 Ohio 3049

Syllabus

Preindictment delay, actual prejudice, speculation, manifest weight, DNA evidence, credibility, effective assistance of counsel, independent expert, consecutive sentences, moot. Defendant failed to demonstrate actual prejudice in his motion to dismiss for preindictment delay because he only presented speculative reasoning. Defendant's convictions were not against the manifest weight of the evidence because DNA evidence linked the defendant to the victim, and weighing the evidence and evaluating credibility rests with the trier of fact. Counsel was not ineffective for failing to consult with or obtain an independent expert to evaluate the DNA evidence. Counsel's decision to instead employ rigorous cross-examination of the state's expert may have been tactical. Defendant's consecutive sentence challenge is moot because the sentence was ordered consecutive to the life-without-parole sentence he was already serving.