2021 Ohio 1507
Ohio Ct. App.2021Background
- Victim Jalin Spencer and Damonte Cole‑Walker were in a year‑long relationship that ended in July 2019; Spencer filed a civil protection order (CPO) in Butler County after post‑breakup conflicts.
- In September 2019 Spencer, working as a DoorDash driver, picked up an order at a Buffalo Wild Wings in Colerain Township and found Cole‑Walker sitting by her car.
- According to Spencer, Cole‑Walker insisted on rekindling the relationship, then groped her right breast and buttock; she drove to the police station and reported the incident the same day.
- The state introduced a copy of Spencer’s Butler County CPO filing, a DoorDash receipt confirming her presence/time at the restaurant, and Officer Wood’s report/testimony to corroborate her account.
- Cole‑Walker presented no testimony, argued the victim lacked credibility and that the conviction rested solely on uncorroborated victim testimony under R.C. 2907.06(B); the municipal court convicted and sentenced him, and the court of appeals affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Corroboration under R.C. 2907.06(B) | DoorDash receipt, CPO filing, and officer testimony provide corroboration of victim's account | No eyewitness or friend testimony; corroboration does not directly prove the sexual contact or show victim demeanor | Corroboration threshold is low; the receipt, CPO, and police report sufficiently corroborated Spencer's testimony and satisfied R.C. 2907.06(B) |
| Manifest weight / credibility | Victim's testimony was detailed, consistent, matched the police report, and was supported by corroborating evidence | Victim had motive to fabricate (spite), exaggerated fear, and lacked corroborative demeanor evidence | Trial court's credibility finding was reasonable; not an exceptional case warranting reversal on manifest weight grounds |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Economo, 76 Ohio St.3d 56, 666 N.E.2d 225 (establishes R.C. 2907.06(B) requires a corroboration threshold; slight evidence may suffice)
- State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259, 574 N.E.2d 492 (sets sufficiency standard: evidence viewed in light most favorable to prosecution)
- State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380, 678 N.E.2d 541 (explains manifest‑weight review and "thirteenth juror" role)
- State v. Martin, 20 Ohio App.3d 172, 485 N.E.2d 717 (reversal for manifest weight limited to exceptional cases)
- Fitzgerald v. United States, 443 A.2d 1295 (prompt reporting to police or others may constitute corroboration)