State v. Clinger, 2022 Ohio 3691

Background

On Nov. 11, 2020, deputies responded to Deer Run campground after a woman (Marie) screamed for help; Marie told Deputy Boyd that appellant Cale Clinger shoved her out of a trailer and she fell and scraped her knee.
A week later Marie sent a letter recanting, saying she "tripped over the rug" and citing chemotherapy-related memory problems; a jail call recording captured Clinger urging his mother Mona to get Marie to recant and suggesting explanations to give at the preliminary hearing.
Clinger was indicted for domestic violence (charged as a fourth-degree felony due to a prior domestic-violence conviction); the case was tried to a jury in Sept. 2021.
At trial the state played Marie’s recorded statement to the deputy, introduced the recantation letter and the jail-call recording, and presented testimony from Deputy Boyd and Marie; Mona testified that Cale is not violent, prompting cross-examination about his prior convictions.
Clinger testified and admitted a prior domestic-violence conviction; the jury convicted him and the court imposed an 18-month prison term (maximum for a fourth-degree felony).
On appeal Clinger challenged (1) admission of prior-conviction evidence elicited on Mona’s cross-examination, (2) sufficiency and manifest weight of the evidence, and (3) the imposition of the maximum sentence.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Admissibility of prior convictions on cross-examination (Evid.R. 404/405/609)	Prosecutor: Mona’s testimony that Cale is “not violent” opened the door to rebuttal by specific prior acts and convictions; prior DV conviction is relevant to rebut the nonviolent-character testimony.	Clinger: Prior convictions (beyond the prior DV) were inadmissible other-acts evidence and unduly prejudicial under Evid.R. 404(B).	Court: Mona opened the door; the prior DV conviction was admissible to rebut her opinion; other nonviolent offenses were not strictly relevant but any error was harmless given overwhelming properly admitted evidence.
Sufficiency and manifest weight of the evidence	State: Recorded statement to deputy, Marie’s initial report, jail-call showing attempt to procure recantation, and other testimony support a finding beyond a reasonable doubt.	Clinger: All eyewitnesses (himself, Marie, Mona) later testified he did not shove Marie; recantation undermines the state’s case.	Court: Evidence was sufficient; the jury did not lose its way—the initial statement to police, recordings, and attempt to procure recantation supported the verdict.
Sentencing: whether R.C. 2929.13 findings required and whether maximum sentence was improper	State: Sentence within statutory range; court considered PSI and applicable statutory factors.	Clinger: Trial court erred by not making R.C. 2929.13 findings and abused discretion by imposing maximum given minor injury.	Court: R.C. 2929.13(B)(1)(a) (mandatory community control) applies only to nonviolent fourth-degree felonies; domestic violence is an offense of violence so statute did not apply. The court considered R.C. 2929.11/2929.12 and the 18‑month term was lawful.

Key Cases Cited

State v. Tench, 156 Ohio St.3d 85 (Evidentiary error harmless standard for other-acts evidence)
State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (sufficiency test: evidence viewed in light most favorable to prosecution)
State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (manifest-weight review standard)
State v. McKelton, 148 Ohio St.3d 261 (appellate review of weight claims; credibility assessment standard)
State v. Lytle, 48 Ohio St.2d 391 (harmless-error rule for evidentiary admissions)
State v. Jackson, 57 Ohio St.3d 29 (character-witness opinion may be tested on cross by inquiry into specific conduct)
State v. Grubb, 111 Ohio App.3d 277 (limits on using prior acts to prove character and action in conformity)
State v. Morris, 141 Ohio St.3d 399 (improper Evid.R. 404(B) admission may be harmless where remaining evidence is overwhelming)
State v. Marcum, 146 Ohio St.3d 516 (standard of review under R.C. 2953.08 for felony-sentencing appeals)
State v. Jones, 163 Ohio St.3d 242 (trial court not required to make specific factual findings under R.C. 2929.11/2929.12)