State v. Smith

Citations

• 2020 Ohio 4008

Syllabus

Appellant's convictions for gross sexual imposition and rape were supported by the manifest weight of the evidence where the state presented evidence that he had groomed and sexually abused the victim at numerous dates and locations while the victim was under the age of 13. Additionally, venue was proper even though one count occurred in a separate county, as the state proved that appellant committed the crimes as a course of criminal conduct. Nor did trial court err by permitting certain hearsay statements made as consistent with the exception for medical diagnosis and treatment and did not err by permitting evidence of purported \other acts\ testimony that was part and parcel of the case and did not constitute inadmissible \other acts\ evidence. In addition, the prosecutor did not commit prosecutorial misconduct during closing argument by responding to issues raised by the accused and in stating that it was unlawful to engage in sexual conduct with a child under the age of 13.