State v. Anderson
2016 Ohio 7275
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2016Background
- In Nov. 2014 S.F. fell asleep in a garage where defendant Robert C. Anderson was present; she later awoke to Anderson on top of her with her leggings down and reported anal and vaginal penetration.
- S.F. reported the incident to a friend and 911; medical exam documented anal redness and a rape kit was collected.
- DNA testing (STR and Y-STR) produced profiles from vaginal/anal/perianal swabs consistent with Anderson; sperm was identified on an anal/perianal sample; S.F.’s boyfriend was excluded.
- Anderson gave a recorded statement saying he touched S.F. while she was half-asleep, denied penile or digital penetration, admitted being stoned, and claimed a medical condition prevented penetration.
- A jury acquitted Anderson of two rape counts but convicted him of sexual battery (R.C. 2907.03(A)(3)); he was sentenced to five years and appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Anderson) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Whether evidence was sufficient to deny Crim.R. 29 motion and support sexual battery conviction | Evidence (victim testimony, medical findings, DNA linking Anderson) if believed proves sexual conduct while victim asleep | Insufficient evidence; victim credibility impeached; impossible to remove clothing without waking her; Anderson denied penetration | Court: Evidence sufficient; Crim.R.29 denial proper and conviction supported |
| 2. Whether credibility attacks (prior drug/mental-health history and family testimony) render evidence insufficient | Victim’s consistent testimony and corroborating medical/DNA evidence sustain conviction despite impeachment attempts | Victim lacks credibility; family testimony undermines her account | Court: Credibility for jury to decide; impeachment did not make evidence insufficient |
| 3. Whether the verdict was against the manifest weight of the evidence | Jury’s verdict reasonable given consistent testimony, medical findings, and DNA corroboration | Jury lost its way; inconsistencies and circumstances (waking without objection) undermine verdict | Court: Not against manifest weight; jury did not lose its way |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (1991) (standard for sufficiency review: whether evidence, if believed, could convince a reasonable juror beyond a reasonable doubt)
- State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (1997) (clarifies standards of review for sufficiency versus manifest weight)
- State v. Otten, 33 Ohio App.3d 339 (1986) (framework for manifest-weight review: whether the trier of fact clearly lost its way)