State v. Cruz, 2013 Ohio 215

Defendant Alfredo Cruz was indicted in 2005 for kidnapping and four counts of rape involving a nine-year-old, W.C.
The case lay dormant until Cruz was located in Mexico and extradited in 2011, with not guilty pleas entered on September 28, 2011.
A jury trial produced testimony from W.C., her grandmother, medical staff, and detectives regarding assaults at Cruz's home in 2005.
W.C. testified that Cruz repeatedly sexually assaulted her, including vaginal, anal, and oral acts, and that she escaped while Cruz slept.
The medical and physical evidence included genital redness/abrasions, dried blood in the vaginal area, DNA on W.C.’s chest/legs, fingerprint evidence, and W.C.’s bicycle in Cruz’s home; no semen was found.
Cruz was convicted on four counts of rape and one count of kidnapping, with the kidnapping merged into the rape convictions, and he received four life sentences.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court erred by not instructing on gross sexual imposition	Cruz argues gross sexual imposition is a lesser included offense of rape.	State should have given the lesser-included offense instruction based on evidence of sexual contact.	No reversible error; no evidence supported gross sexual imposition as a lesser offense.
Whether the court erred by not removing two jurors for cause	Jurors 992 and 263 demonstrated potential bias from personal experiences.	The court should have struck biased jurors for cause to ensure impartiality.	No abuse of discretion; court properly evaluated impartiality and demeanor.
Ineffective assistance of counsel for not challenging juror 263	Counsel should have peremptorily challenged juror 263 due to potential bias.	No deficiency; counsel's strategic decisions are permissible and no prejudice shown.	No ineffective assistance; no showing juror 263 was actually biased or that failure to challenge affected outcome.
Whether the convictions are against the manifest weight of the evidence	Anal intercourse lacked corroborating physical evidence.	DNA and other physical findings, plus victim testimony, suffice to sustain convictions.	Convictions not against the manifest weight; the testimony and evidence support the jury’s findings.

Johnson v. Ohio, 36 Ohio St.3d 224 (1988) (no instruction for gross sexual imposition where defendant denies participation and only penetration proven)
State v. Carroll, 2007-Ohio-7075 (Ohio Supreme Court 2007) (standard for instructing on lesser-included offenses)
State v. Shane, 63 Ohio St.3d 630 (1992) (evidence threshold for lesser-included offense instructions)
State v. Anderson, 2006-Ohio-2714 (2006) (evidence evaluation for lesser-included offenses; light in weight rules)
State v. Mundt, 115 Ohio St.3d 22 (2007) (subjectivity of voir dire and jury selection largely strategic)
State v. Good, 2008-Ohio-4502 (2008) (reaffirms appellate deference to trial court on jury issues)
State v. Miller, 2010-Ohio-1722 (2010) (preserves discretion on for-cause challenges and voir dire)