State v. Bradley, 2012 Ohio 4787

Bradley appeals after conviction in Stark County Common Pleas for domestic violence, burglary, and criminal damaging with a 24‑month total term.
Bradley had a past relationship with Gadison with whom he shares a 5‑year‑old daughter; as of Aug 10, 2011 he lived with Gadison and her children.
On Aug 10, 2011 Bradley assaulted Gadison, kicked walls, threw a plate with candles, and head‑beated her; their children witnessed the events.
Bradley damaged Gadison’s car by throwing a brick and attempted to pour sugar into the gas tank; Gadison required hospital care.
Bradley was charged with felonious assault, domestic violence, burglary, child endangering, and criminal damaging; he was convicted of domestic violence, burglary, and criminal damaging, but acquitted of felonious assault and child endangering; the court imposed consecutive terms on the domestic violence and burglary counts.
The Court of Appeals remanded for resentencing under HB 86 due to lack of proper judicial fact‑finding for consecutive sentences.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Bradley's convictions are supported by sufficient evidence and not against the weight of the evidence.	Bradley argues insufficiency and weight issues.	Bradley contends evidence fails to prove elements beyond a reasonable doubt.	Convictions affirmed; evidence adequate and not against weight of the evidence.
Whether the court abused its discretion by excluding grandmother Hooten’s testimony to challenge Gadison’s credibility.	Bradley argues Ex.R. 608 testimony should have been allowed.	Trial court did not abuse discretion; testimony excluded per 608(B).	Exclusion not an abuse of discretion.
Whether the consecutive sentences were properly imposed under HB 86 requiring factual findings.	Bradley asserts the court failed to make required factual findings for consecutive terms.	Bradley argues findings were made or implied by ruling.	Remanded for resentencing to comply with HB 86 requirements.

State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (Ohio Sup. Ct. 1997) (definitions of sufficiency and weight of the evidence)
State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (Ohio Sup. Ct. 1991) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of evidence)
State v. DeHass, 10 Ohio St.3d 230 (Ohio Sup. Ct. 1967) (credibility determinations are jury prerogatives)
State v. Sage, 31 Ohio St.3d 173 (Ohio Sup. Ct. 1987) (admission of specific instances of conduct as cross‑examination on truthfulness)
State v. Hymore, 9 Ohio St.2d 122 (Ohio Sup. Ct. 1967) (abuses of discretion in evidentiary rulings standards)
State v. Frasca, 2012-Ohio-3746 (Ohio 11th Dist.) (HB 86 consecutive sentencing findings requirements (cited regarding findings))