State v. Jackson

Citations

• 2022 Ohio 2562

Syllabus

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW/CRIMINAL – MOTION TO SUPPRESS – MIRANDA – WAIVER – CONFESSION – INDICTMENT – COUNSEL – CONFRONTATION CLAUSE – EVID.R. 803(4) – R.C. 2907.02 – SEX OFFENSES – RAPE – EVIDENCE: Where the waiver of defendant's Miranda rights was made knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently, and where defendant's confession was not coerced, the trial court did not err in denying defendant's motion to suppress. Where the amendment to the indictment did not change the name or identity of the offenses, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in granting the state's motion to amend the indictment. Where allegations of ineffectiveness are based on facts outside the record, an appellate court cannot determine whether ineffective assistance of counsel occurred. Trial counsel was not ineffective for failing to object to the admission of a videotaped interview between a child victim and a social worker where the child's statements in the interview were not testimonial and did not violate the Confrontation Clause and where the child's statements were admissible under Evid.R. 803(4) because they were made for purposes of medical diagnosis and treatment. Defendant's convictions for rape were supported by the sufficiency and the weight of the evidence.