State v. Wright

Citations

• 2022 Ohio 1786

Syllabus

In a jury trial on three counts of rape (child under 13), the trial court did not err in admitting hearsay evidence, and plain error is not demonstrated. Law enforcement witnesses did not improperly vouch for the victim's credibility. The trial court did not err in admitting the testimony of the State's expert witness (without objection), and the testimony did not exceed the scope of the expert's report. Prosecutorial misconduct is not demonstrated in closing argument regarding touch DNA evidence and appellant's experience as a police officer. The prosecutor's remarks in closing about the victim did not urge sympathy for her independent of the evidence, and the prosecutor did not express an opinion regarding the victim's credibility or improperly inflame the jury. Appellant was not denied the right to present a meaningful defense his expert witness testified that the victim's normal exam should be considered along with her reported lengthy history of penetrative abuse. Plain error is not demonstrated in the court's jury instruction regarding the hymen. Ineffective assistance of counsel is not demonstrated in defense counsel's failure to object to hearsay, failure to challenge the State's experts pursuant citing to Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 113 S.Ct. 2786, 125 L.Ed.2d 469 (1993), or in defense counsel's cross-examination of witnesses. Appellant's convictions were supported by sufficient evidence and were not against the manifest weight of the evidence, and cumulative error is not demonstrated. Judgment affirmed.