State v. Boles, 2013 Ohio 5202

Defendant Patrick D. Boles, uncle of the victim D.L., was indicted for eight counts of rape with alleged conduct in 1991–1992 when D.L. was 11–12.
D.L. testified to four 1991 acts and four 1992 acts; the 1991 acts led to four rape convictions, the 1992 acts were acquitted.
Evidence at trial included family testimony about grooming, and expert Dr. Bassman on grooming and delayed reporting.
Hackworth-Rogers testified to an early grooming-like tickling incident; the brother testified about pornography in appellant's car.
The jury convicted on the 1991 counts and acquitted on the 1992 counts; appellant was sentenced to 15 to 45 years in prison.
Appeal challenges center on evidentiary rulings and whether the verdicts are supported by the weight and sufficiency of the evidence.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Admissibility of other-acts evidence	State; evidence tended to show motive/intent in grooming	Boles; evidence was prejudicial and improper under 404(B)	Admissible; no abuse of discretion
Weight and sufficiency of the evidence	State; sufficient and weighty proof supported all rape counts	Boles; insufficient and against weight; inconsistent verdicts	Convictions supported by weight and by sufficient evidence

State v. Martin, 2007-Ohio-7073 (12th Dist. Butler (2007)) (evidentiary discretion; abuse when prejudicial)
State v. Smith, 2008-Ohio-5931 (12th Dist. Fayette (2008)) (evidentiary rulings reviewed for prejudice)
State v. Perkins, 2005-Ohio-6557 (12th Dist. Clinton (2005)) (abuse of discretion standard; 404(B) guidance)
State v. Wightman, 2008-Ohio-95 (12th Dist. Fayette (2008)) (R.C. 2945.59 and 404(B) admissibility framework)
State v. Crotts, 104 Ohio St.3d 432 (2004) (limitations on other-acts evidence; purpose matters)
State v. Stowers, 81 Ohio St.3d 260 (1998) (limits on bolstering child witnesses; admissibility of related testimony)
State v. Cappadonia, 2011-Ohio-494 (12th Dist. Warren (2011)) (distinguishes admissible non-veracity-related expert testimony)
State v. Cashin, 2009-Ohio-6419 (10th Dist. Franklin (2009)) (expert testimony linking to victim credibility; permissible)
State v. Barnes, 2011-Ohio-5226 (12th Dist. Brown (2011)) (consistency of expert testimony with victim's statements permissible)
State v. Boston, 46 Ohio St.3d 108 (1989) (excludes expert vouching for victim credibility; distinguishes bolstering)
State v. Cripps, not included (WL citation) () (not cited due to non-official reporter)
State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (1997) (establishes sufficiency/weight distinctions; standard guidance)
State v. Malott, 2008-Ohio-2114 (12th Dist. Butler (2008)) (weight vs. sufficiency discussed)