Skip to main content

State v. Murphy

Citations

  • 2019 Ohio 4347

Syllabus

Rape R.C. 2907.02(A)(1)(b) kidnapping R.C. 2905.01(A)(4) sexual motivation specification R.C. 2941.147 disseminating matter harmful to juveniles R.C. 2907.31(A)(1) sufficiency and manifest weight of the evidence Evid.R. 607(A) witness impeachment Evid.R. 702 expert testimony Evid.R. 704 opinion on ultimate issue Evid.R. 401 relevant evidence Evid.R. 402 relevant and irrelevant evidence Evid.R. 403(A) danger of unfair prejudice Crim.R. 52 harmless error plain error ineffective assistance of counsel R.C. 2907.02(D) rape shield statute R.C. 2907.02(E) admissibility hearing. Appellant's convictions for rape, kidnapping, and disseminating matter harmful to a juvenile were legally sufficient and were not against the manifest weight of the evidence. The child victim provided detailed and consistent accounts of the activities and a victim's testimony alone is sufficient for a conviction. A medical sexual abuse expert may provide testimony that supports the facts presented by the child victim to assist the factfinder's determination of truthfulness. The expert's opinion that sexual abuse may have occurred in spite of the lack of genital trauma was fully explained, did not constitute testimony regarding the victim's veracity, and was admissible under Evid.R. 104, 702, and 704. A social worker's testimony regarding the agency's categorization of a sexual abuse case as \substantiated\ does not constitute testimony regarding the truthfulness or credibility of the alleged victim, particularly where no opinion is offered on the identity of the alleged perpetrator. It was wholly within the trial court's discretion to exclude evidence that is deemed irrelevant under Evid.R. 401, 402, and 403. The exclusion of the evidence did not affect the appellant's substantial rights that would require reversal. Also, the jury heard the information during appellant's video police interview. Evid.R. 607(A) that allows the credibility of a witness to be attacked by the party calling the witness do

Judges: Laster Mays

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

7 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

48 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.