State v. Blasenhauer
2017 Ohio 7357
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Appellant Robert L. Blasenhauer, Jr. was convicted in Guernsey County Court of Common Pleas of one count of rape against his eight-year-old daughter, B.B.
- B.B. testified Appellant, while intoxicated, pulled down her pants and engaged in sexual conduct in the family bedroom, with semen found on bed and in vaginal/perianal areas.
- M.B., the wife, reported the incident, photographed evidence, and law enforcement investigators observed a semen stain and other sexual contact indicators.
- Appellant was intoxicated at the time of arrest; law enforcement found him in a truck, shirtless, with no underwear, after the event.
- The State presented DNA evidence linking semen from B.B. to Appellant; the jury convicted him of rape under R.C. 2907.02(A)(1)(b).
- Appellant appeals asserting multiple trial court errors, including hearsay, other-acts evidence, improper expert testimony, prosecutorial misconduct, ineffective assistance, and sufficiency/weight challenges.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hearsay evidence admitted without objection | Blasenhauer argues plain error by admitting hearsay as to prior allegations through Deputy Oakley and MB/K.B. | Blasenhauer contends admission violated Confrontation and due process. | Overruled; plain error not shown. |
| Other acts evidence admissibility | State claims evidence of prior acts was admissible under Evid.R. 404(B) and RC 2945.59. | Blasenhauer asserts improper admission since identity/intent not at issue and danger of prejudice. | Overruled; evidence properly admitted or harmless. |
| Expert testimony about credibility | State argues Dr. Hamad’s demeanor-based statements were admissible for credibility. | Blasenhauer asserts improper expert commentary on credibility. | Overruled; admission deemed harmless error. |
| Prosecutorial conduct regarding silence and 401(k) funds | State argues comments about appellant’s silence and use of 401(k) funds were proper. | Blasenhauer contends these comments violated rights to silence and counsel. | Overruled; remarks did not deprive due process; not reversible error. |
| Sufficiency/weight of the evidence | Evidence, including DNA and eyewitness testimony, proves rape under statute. | Blasenhauer challenges sufficiency and manifest weight. | Overruled; evidence supports conviction. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Jones, 91 Ohio St.3d 335 (2001) (objection rule for preserving error; plain error standard)
- State v. Robb, 88 Ohio St.3d 59 (2000) (Crim.R. 52(B) plain error caution)
- State v. Lindsey, 87 Ohio St.3d 479 (2000) (preservation and plain error guidance)
- State v. Carter, 26 Ohio St.2d 79 (1971) (admissibility of other-acts for motive/intent)
- State v. Lowe, 69 Ohio St.3d 527 (1994) (evidence of other acts; listed purposes)
- State v. Broom, 40 Ohio St.3d 277 (1988) (other-acts admissibility framework)