State v. Morgan

Citations

• 2017 Ohio 7489

Syllabus

EVIDENCE - CHARACTER EVIDENCE - PREJUDICE - EVID.R. 402 - EVID.R. 403 - EVID.R. 404 - EVID.R. 801 - HEARSAY - PROSECUTOR - CLOSING ARGUMENT: In a murder trial, where defendant conveyed to the jury through her testimony that she was a peaceful person who preferred to resolve conflicts in a peaceful manner, the trial court did not err in allowing the state to rebut that implication by introducing evidence, under Evid.R. 404(A)(1), that defendant had previously resolved conflicts with violence. The trial court did not err in admitting into evidence recordings of jail telephone calls made by defendant where the calls were relevant and the probative value of the calls was not outweighed by any danger of unfair prejudice, and where the admission of any irrelevant information in the calls resulted in no prejudice to the defendant. The trial court erred in determining that defendant's nonverbal conduct in a videotaped interview constituted a statement under Evid.R. 801(A), and therefore was inadmissible hearsay under Evid.R. 801(D)(2)(a) however, the trial court's exclusion of the video evidence was not prejudicial where the court ruled that defendant could introduce a still photograph from the video and where defense counsel elicited testimony from the detective who had conducted the interview describing defendant's demeanor and appearance as it would have appeared on the video. Where a 911 call had been admitted into evidence during a witness's testimony, it was not error to allow the prosecutor to replay the 911 call during closing argument.