State v. Komara

Citations

• 2023 Ohio 1564

Syllabus

Prior consistent statement Evid.R. 801(d) domestic violence self-defense credibility manifest weight. The trial court did not err by denying rebuttal evidence of a prior consistent statement pursuant to Evid.R. 801(D). A review of the record reveals that the trial court did not make a ruling disallowing appellant to call a witness or introduce evidence. However, to the extent the appellant was disallowed from proffering evidence, we find that it was not a prior consistent statement contemplated by Evid.R. 801(D) because the evidence would have been both inconsistent and consistent with appellants testimony at trial. Appellant's conviction for domestic violence was not against the manifest weight of the evidence. The jury heard testimony from appellant and the victim regarding the incident at issue. Both the appellant and the victim stated that the other was the initial aggressor of the incident. The jury also saw photos of each of their injuries. The jury was able to make a credibility determination to determine whether appellant or the victim was the initial aggressor and whether the appellant acted in self-defense. Judgment affirmed.