State v. T.S.

Citations

• 2021 Ohio 2203

Syllabus

The trial court did not err when overruling the appellant's motion for a new trial under Crim.R.33. based on the purported recantation of the minor victim's trial testimony of sexual abuse. Even if appellant had rights of confrontation and compulsory process under the United States and Ohio Constitutions that applied during the hearing as he asserts, he did not have the right to call the victim as a witness for the sole purpose of having her invoke her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination at the hearing, as her attorney informed the trial court that she would do. On the merits of the motion for a new trial, there was no strong probability of a new trial having a different result from the original trial. There was strong evidence of guilt independent of the victim's testimony, as the appellant had confessed the conduct to investigators and the admissibility of his statements was affirmed on the direct appeal.