State v. Hill

Citations

• 2018 Ohio 3130

Syllabus

BURGLARY – EVIDENCE – CONSTITUTIONAL LAW/CRIMINAL – MIRANDA – CUSTODIAL INTERROGATION – OTHER ACTS – COUNSEL – CUMULATIVE ERROR: In a prosecution for burglary in violation of R.C. 2911.12(A)(2), where the state presented evidence that a home was regularly inhabited, the residents were in and out of the home on the day of the burglary, and the residents were temporarily absent at the time of the offense, the state presented sufficient evidence to prove the likely-to-be-present element. A suspect who voluntarily gives information without being asked questions is not subject to custodial interrogation and is not entitled to Miranda warnings. Where defendant voluntarily submitted into evidence videos that contained other-acts evidence, he waived the right to appeal their admissibility. Defense counsel's failure to object to the other-acts evidence did not constitute deficient performance where the case was tried to the bench and defendant failed to establish that the court considered the evidence or that there is a reasonable probability that the result of the trial would have been different absent the evidence. The doctrine of cumulative error is inapplicable where there are not multiple instances of harmless error.