State v. Jones

Citations

• 208 N.E.3d 321
• 2023 Ohio 380

Syllabus

Confrontation Clause non-testimonial statements testimonial statements objective witness test primary purpose test ongoing emergency hearsay excited utterance Evid.R. 803(2) Crim.R. 29(A) motion for acquittal sufficiency of the evidence manifest weight of the evidence allied offenses of similar import R.C. 2941.25 imposition of consecutive sentences indefinite sentence Reagan Tokes Law reopening case App.R. 12(A)(2) App.R. 16(A)(7). Declarant's statements to neighbor, 911 operator, and EMS dispatcher were nontestimonial and admission of such statements did not violate the Confrontation Clause where declarant was in need of medical assistance and the primary purpose of statements was to obtain medical assistance. Declarant's statements to neighbor, 911 operator and EMS dispatcher were admissible as excited utterances under Evid.R. 803(2) where declarant personally observed a startling event, statements related to the startling event, and statements were made while declarant was still under the stress of excitement from the startling event. Declarant's statements to police officers while in the custody of EMS personnel, receiving medical care in the back of an ambulance, at the hospital, and at a nursing facility were testimonial and admission of police officer testimony and body camera footage of such statements violated the Confrontation Clause where the primary purpose of the interrogation was to document past events for a later criminal investigation or prosecution. However, the erroneous admission of such evidence was harmless error where it was duplicative and cumulative of other, properly admitted evidence of declarant's statements to neighbor, 911 operator, and EMS dispatcher. Defendant's convictions for aggravated arson, felonious assault, arson, and domestic violence were supported by sufficient evidence and were not against the manifest weight of the evidence. Defendant cited no legal authority and made no argument in support of claim that trial court erred