State v. Newell

Citations

• 2019 Ohio 976

Syllabus

Crim.R. 16(B) — discovery Brady violation abuse of discretion polygraph examination DNA evidence motion for mistrial R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) — consecutive sentences manifest weight ineffective assistance of counsel cumulative error doctrine. The trial court did not err in denying appellant's motion for mistrial or for failing to sanction appellee for alleged misconduct. There was no Brady violation where evidence of the polygraph test was disclosed during trial and appellant failed to show that the evidence was material to a finding of guilt or that it would have caused a different outcome. The information about the visit to the crime scene also failed to meet the criteria for a Brady violation. The failure to test appellant's DNA standard did not rise to the level of a Brady violation where there was no other DNA evidence recovered from the crime scene to compare to and appellant failed to provide support for his claims of police misconduct. The trial court made the necessary findings and incorporated those findings into the sentencing journal entry. Appellant provided no detailed argument or citations to support his contention that there was insufficient evidence to convict him on the aggravated murder, murder, felonious assault, kidnapping, and one- and three-year firearm and criminal gang activity counts sufficient evidence was presented to support conviction on all other counts, and the evidence was not against the manifest weight of the evidence. Appellant failed to show that his trial counsel's representation fell below a reasonable standard of performance. The doctrine of cumulative error does not apply here where appellant's other assignments of error are meritless.