State v. Tolliver

Citations

• 2020 Ohio 3121

Syllabus

Superseding indictment prosecutorial vindictiveness due process sufficiency of the evidence manifest weight of the evidence allied offenses. - Defendant was not denied due process, and a reindictment close to the trial date was not the result of prosecutorial vindictiveness where the defendant was informed during plea negotiations that he would be reindicted on more serious charges if he took the matter to trial, and no additional discovery regarding the new charges was necessary after reindictment because the evidence regarding the reindicted charges was contained in the discovery exchanged after the original indictment defendant's convictions for felonious assault, domestic violence, and kidnapping were supported by sufficient evidence and not against the weight of the evidence the trial court did not err in not merging the kidnapping convictions with the felonious assault and domestic violence convictions where defendant secreted the victim away from her family for an extended period while he assaulted her and restrained her multiple times from leaving, thereby demonstrating a separate animus for the offenses.