State v. Toney

Citations

• 2026 Ohio 933

Syllabus

Rape; consecutive sentences; R.C. 2929.14(C)(4); remote testimony; Confrontation Clause; harmless error; duplicative testimony; Crim.R. 16(I); witness lists; plain error; cumulative error; manifest weight; credibility; sentencing factors; life terms; R.C. 2971.03(B)(1)(b). Affirmed. Although the trial court erred by permitting the forensic interviewer to testify remotely, that error was harmless based on the remaining evidence and the duplication of testimony from the investigating detective. Because the defendant did not object to a statement made to the venire before the jury was picked and failed to object to any testimony encroaching on victim-impact territory, and because the appellant failed to discuss plain error, there is no reversible error. The defendant's claim that the defendant's father's absence from trial was commented on by the prosecutor is not supported by the record and none of the convictions are against the weight of the evidence solely based on the inconsistencies in the testimony heard by the jury. And finally, a trial court has authority to impose indefinite life sentences consecutively, which are statutorily required under R.C. 2971.03(B)(1)(b).