State v. Collmar
2013 Ohio 1766
Ohio Ct. App.2013Background
- Indicted on felonious assault, felony domestic violence, and misdemeanor domestic violence; pled not guilty.
- Plea negotiations occurred under Crim.R. 11 aiming for DV court intensive probation, but Collmar rejected the terms.
- Trial proceeded to verdict: not guilty of felonious assault, guilty on both counts of domestic violence; misdemeanor merged into felony; three-year prison sentence.
- Evidence included victim Radcliff’s 911 call, police and medical testimony, and autoinvolved photos; victim immunized for trial.
- Police and paramedics testified to visible injuries and inconsistent statements; Collmar admitted living with Radcliff and argued about events.
- Court affirmed conviction and rejected three assignments of error regarding sufficiency, weight, and sentencing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the evidence supports domestic violence conviction | Collmar argues insufficient evidence. | Collmar contends the State failed to prove DV elements. | Evidence sufficient; conviction upheld. |
| Whether the DV conviction is against the manifest weight of the evidence | Collmar claims weight favors acquittal. | State contends record supports jury’s credibility determinations. | Not against the manifest weight; affirmed. |
| Whether the sentence was vindictive after allocution | Collmar asserts punitive sentence for going to trial. | State argues proper discretion and sentencing factors. | Sentence within statutory limits and not vindictive. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (1991 Ohio) (standard for sufficiency review; reaffirms proper appellate function on sufficiency)
- State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (1997 Ohio) (test for sufficiency after viewing evidence in light favorable to prosecution)
- State v. Walker, 9th Dist. No. 20559, 2001 WL 1581570 (Dec. 12, 2001) (cited for sufficiency standard (WL not acceptable; kept for context))
- State v. Otten, 33 Ohio App.3d 339 (1986 Ohio) (manifest weight framework; ‘thirteenth juror’ concept)
- State v. Crowe, 9th Dist. No. 04CA0098-M, 2005-Ohio-4082 (2005 Ohio) (weight of evidence—courts defer to jury credibility determinations)
- State v. Mayle, 7th Dist. No. 04 CA 808, 2005-Ohio-1346 (2005 Ohio) (authorizes considering differences between trial and plea sentencing)