State v. Boss
2017 Ohio 697
Ohio Ct. App.2017Background
- Jordan M. Boss was charged with one count of fourth-degree misdemeanor domestic violence (R.C. 2919.25(C)) after a March 31, 2016 911 call by his wife, Tesa Boss.
- Officer Jeremy Jarvis responded within minutes; he testified Tesa appeared scared, distraught, and told him Boss pushed her while she held their infant and threatened to kill her over a PlayStation.
- The 911 recording was played at trial over defense objection; Tesa later recanted in a sworn statement, invoked the Fifth Amendment as a court witness, and at trial testified she had only been bumped and had mental-health–related panic attacks.
- Boss testified he only brushed her shoulder and denied threats.
- A jury found Boss guilty; the municipal court sentenced him to 30 days (20 suspended) and one year probation. Boss appealed, raising admissibility/hearsay challenges to the 911 tape and officer testimony and arguing the conviction was against the manifest weight of the evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of 911 tape | Tape admissible under business-records exception or, alternatively, as an excited utterance | Tape was hearsay and improperly admitted | Tape admissible as excited utterance; admission not reversible error |
| Admission of officer testimony recounting victim statements | Victim’s statements to officer were excited utterances and admissible | Statements were hearsay and should have been excluded | Statements qualified as excited utterances and were admissible |
| Weight of the evidence / sufficiency of conviction | Victim’s contemporaneous statements and officer observations support conviction | Victim recanted; testimony undermines reliability — conviction against manifest weight | Jury credibility determinations upheld; conviction not against manifest weight |
| Standard of review for evidentiary rulings | Trial court’s evidentiary rulings reviewed for abuse of discretion | (implicit) erroneous rulings require reversal | Majority applied abuse-of-discretion standard; concurring opinion noted that standard citation (Sage) was unnecessary |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Sage, 31 Ohio St.3d 173 (1987) (abuse of discretion standard for relevancy evidentiary rulings)
- Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (1983) (definition of abuse of discretion)
- State v. Jones, 135 Ohio St.3d 10 (2012) (framework for evaluating excited-utterance hearsay exception)
- State v. Taylor, 66 Ohio St.3d 295 (1993) (timing and emotional state considerations for excited utterances)
- State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (1997) (manifest-weight-of-the-evidence standard)
- State v. DeHass, 10 Ohio St.2d 230 (1967) (deference to trier of fact on witness credibility)
- Davis v. Flickinger, 77 Ohio St.3d 415 (1997) (trial court’s advantage in assessing witness demeanor and credibility)