State v. Roper

Citations

• 2022 Ohio 244

Syllabus

The trial court did not err by permitting a witness to provide expert witness testimony in violation of Evid.R. 702 and Crim.R. 16(K) where the witness at issue testified as a lay witness, not an expert witness, given the witness's testimony related to the witness's observations and first-hand account of two dogs haggard appearance and obvious malnourishment upon the witness first having contact with the two dogs at the animal hospital where the witness worked as the hospital's boarding lead. Additionally, appellant's conviction for three counts of second-degree misdemeanor cruelty to a companion animal in violation of R.C. 951.131(D)(2) was supported by sufficient evidence where the state provided evidence that the three dogs at issue were underweight, some severely, while in appellant's custody and care, weight that the three dogs quickly regained to once again become healthy, beautiful dogs once the three dogs were moved to a dog shelter and provided with the necessary sustenance and sufficient quantities of good, wholesome food and water.