State v. McInnes

Citations

• 2026 Ohio 734

Syllabus

Burden of proof; affirmative defense; qualified immunity; police; excessive force; expert testimony; lay opinion testimony; sufficiency; manifest weight; Graham v. Connor; confrontation; Garrity statements; Garrity v. New Jersey; grand-jury transcript; sentencing. Trial court properly placed burden of proving affirmative defense of reasonableness on the defendant by a preponderance of the evidence. Trial court properly admitted lay opinion testimony from three police officers where the opinion testimony was based on the rational perception of the witnesses and the testimony was helpful to clear understanding of the use of force under the circumstances. Defendant's convictions were supported by sufficient evidence and by the manifest weight of the evidence where the witnesses' testimony regarding the defendant's use of excessive force was corroborated by body-camera and other video evidence. Defendant's right of confrontation was not violated by the absence of one of the victims from trial because no statements by the absent witness were admitted into evidence and all other witnesses were subject to cross-examination. Even though defendant's supervisor asked him to complete a use-of-force report, there were no Garrity violations because there was no evidence that the defendant was coerced into completing the report. Trial court's denial of defendant's request for grand-jury transcripts was not an abuse of discretion where the defendant failed to establish a particularized need for the transcripts. Defendant's sentence was not contrary to law where the trial court considered applicable sentencing statutes and his sentence was within the statutory range of penalties for his convictions. Defendant's sentence was also supported by the record.