State v. Barrera
2012 Ohio 3196
Ohio Ct. App.2012Background
- Indictment for unlawful sexual conduct with a minor (R.C. 2907.04(A)(B)(3)); the charge was a felony of the third degree.
- Trial court conviction by jury of unlawful sexual conduct with a minor; jury found victim was at least 10 years younger than Barrera.
- Victim D.C. was 15 years old in May 2011; Barrera was 33; Barrera had a parental/coach role connected to the victim’s school and household.
- Barrera and John Salyers were engaged; Barrera served as a junior varsity basketball coach and had access to the victim.
- Trial court sentenced Barrera to three years in prison after a sentencing hearing in November 2011.
- Barrera timely appealed, raising issues related to manifest weight, ineffective assistance of counsel, and the sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the conviction is against the manifest weight of the evidence | State argues evidence supported recklessness and knowledge of underage status | Barrera argues State failed to prove mental culpability (knew or reckless about victim’s age) | Conviction not against manifest weight; evidence supports recklessness/knowledge. |
| Whether Barrera received ineffective assistance of counsel | State contends no Crim.R. 29 acquittal motion required; evidence supported conviction | Barrera claims counsel failed to move for acquittal and was ineffective | No ineffective assistance; motions would have been fruitless given weight of evidence. |
| Whether the three-year sentence was an unlawful maximum under the statute | State argues sentence within statutory range and reflects seriousness | Barrera contends sentence is maximum and unwarranted given circumstances | Sentence within range; not an abuse of discretion given seriousness and factors. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (1997) (reweighting standard for manifest weight review; appellate deference to trial court credibility)
- State v. Martin, 20 Ohio App.3d 172 (1983) (weight of the evidence; credibility and conflicts in testimony)
- State v. DeHass, 10 Ohio St.2d 230 (1967) (standard of reviewing weight and credibility on appeal)
- State v. Schlosser, 2011-Ohio-4183 (3d Dist.) (Crim.R. 29 acquittal motions not ineffective assistance in all cases)
- State v. Giddens, 2002-Ohio-6148 (3d Dist.) (motion practice dependency on sufficiency of evidence)
- State v. Hites, 2012-Ohio-1892 (3d Dist.) (statutory sentencing range after HB 86 guidance)