State v. Mounts

Citations

• 227 N.E.3d 357
• 2023 Ohio 3861

Syllabus

EVIDENCE – MANIFEST WEIGHT – EXPERT TESTIMONY – CRIM.R. 16(K) – LAY-WITNESS TESTIMONY – PLAIN-ERROR DOCTRINE – PROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT: Where there was competing expert testimony on both sides and lay-witness testimony supporting the state's case, the evidence did not point overwhelmingly against conviction and the jury did not lose its way and create a manifest miscarriage of justice. Where defendant agreed not to proffer testimony from an expert witness that the state objected to, defendant waived any claim of error as to the scope of the expert's testimony. Where the state did not move the court to have a witness qualified as an expert and the witness testified appropriately only to his rational perception of defendant's demeanor, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in allowing the witness's testimony. Where the prosecutor's comment during rebuttal argument that defendant objected to merely highlighted an expert witness's bias and motivation to testify, there was no prosecutorial misconduct. Where defendant failed to object to the prosecutor's allegedly improper comments during rebuttal argument and the outcome of the trial would not have been different but for these comments, there was no plain error.