State v. Mills

Citations

• 2026 Ohio 2356

Syllabus

The trial court judge's comments made during voir dire, although unnecessary and serving no real purpose other than to create an arguable issue for appellant to raise on appeal, did not deprive appellant of a fair trial where, upon appellant's objection and motion for a curative instruction, the judge instructed the jury that the judge's comments about the presence or absence of certain evidence at appellant's trial were not to be considered as evidence and should not be relied on for any purpose, thus resulting in appellant suffering no prejudice. Additionally, the trial court did not commit error, plain or otherwise, by admitting so-called \other acts\ evidence at appellant's trial that indicated appellant always had with him and carried a knife on his person, where that evidence was admissible to prove several separate, nonpropensity-based issues, such as opportunity and the absence of mistake or accident. Finally, the jury's verdict finding appellant guilty of one count of attempted murder and two counts of felonious assault stemming from allegations that he stabbed the victim, his supposed longtime close friend, withstood challenges to the sufficiency and the manifest weight of the evidence where the alleged victim testified and specifically identified appellant as his attacker who had stabbed him upwards of eight times in the face, neck, torso, and legs, nearly resulting in the victim's death.