State v. Conner, 192 Ohio App. 3d 166

Todd W. Conner was indicted in two cases: 06CR000177 for burglary and 06CR000181 for rape and aggravated burglary, involving events at the marital home during divorce proceedings.
A jury convicted Conner of one rape, one aggravated burglary, and one burglary; he was sentenced to four, five, and five years respectively, to be served consecutively (14-year total).
Trial transcripts were incomplete due to malfunctioning recording equipment, omitting Conner’s direct testimony and one witness; a supplemental record was later admitted.
The court sua sponte reviewed four assigned errors; the appeal centers on the validity of using an ex parte divorce-order as a basis for burglary charges, sufficiency/weight of the rape conviction, recording defects, and sentencing procedure.
The appellate court affirm the rape conviction and its sentence, but reverse the burglary and aggravated-burglary convictions and related sentences, vacating those convictions and remanding costs to be paid by the appellee.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the ex parte divorce order could support burglary	Conner argues the civil ex parte order was civil, not criminal, and not properly served.	The State contends the order directed exclusive use of the home and thus could support criminal trespass.	Ex parte order could not sustain burglary; convictions vacated.
Whether the rape conviction is against the manifest weight of the evidence	Weight-of-the-evidence review should consider credibility and appraise if evidence clearly tripled the verdict.	Trials weighed credibility; conviction could stand.	Rape conviction not against the manifest weight; affirmed.
Whether the record deficiency from malfunctioning recording prejudiced the defense	Missing testimony and witness were essential to Conner’s defense; the record was incomplete.	Supplemental record fixed the gaps; no prejudice.	Issue deemed moot/so not well taken as to reversal; proper supplementation allowed.
Whether the sentence structure (consecutive imprisonment) and overall sentence were proper	Conner challenges the court’s factual findings and overall sentencing discretion.	Post-Foster sentencing allows no mandatory findings; standards require statutory compliance.	Rape sentence within statutory range; convictions for burglary/aggravated burglary vacated; remaining sentence not reversed.

State v. Lilly, 87 Ohio St.3d 97 (Ohio Supreme Court 1999) (civil orders in divorce contexts; notice requirements and civil-criminal boundary)
State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (Ohio Supreme Court 1997) (sufficiency of evidence standard; ‘test of adequacy’ for conviction)
Kalish v. State, 120 Ohio St.3d 23 (Ohio Supreme Court 2008) (post-Foster sentencing framework; no mandatory findings for length/concurrency)
State v. Ward, 2003-Ohio-5650 (Ohio App.4th Dist. 2003) (record inadequacy and prejudice considerations when transcripts are incomplete)
Beltowski, 2007-Ohio-3372 (Ohio App.11th Dist. 2007) (supplementation of the record under App.R. 9 when material omissions occur)