State v. Curry, 106 N.E.3d 859

In July 1995, two masked assailants robbed four victims at gunpoint in a backyard; two female victims were taken to secluded locations and sexually assaulted.
One female victim (assaulted behind a garage) yielded a vaginal swab in 2013 that did not exclude Ronald Curry; an oral swab and another kit were not tested or are missing.
Curry was indicted and a summons was issued on the last day of the 20-year statute of limitations; trial resulted in convictions for multiple counts including aggravated robbery, rape/attempted rape, kidnapping, and consecutive three-year firearm specifications.
Curry appealed, raising challenges to (1) the commencement of prosecution/statute of limitations, (2) preindictment delay, (3) manifest weight, (4) sufficiency of the evidence, and (5) merger of kidnapping with attempted rape.
The Eighth District affirmed: it found the prosecution timely commenced by summons, no prejudicial preindictment delay, DNA evidence supported identity and sufficiency, the convictions were not against the manifest weight, and merger arguments were either invited or unsupported.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Commencement / statute of limitations	Prosecution timely commenced (summons issued before limitations expired)	Summons not issued in time; capias issued after limitations	Summons was timely on appearance docket; prosecution commenced before expiration
Preindictment delay / due process	Delay justified or not prejudicial; state produced DNA linking Curry	Delay caused actual prejudice (missing rape kit, untested oral swab, faded memories)	Defendant failed to show actual prejudice from delay; missing/untested samples would not undercut the state’s theory
Manifest weight of the evidence	State’s evidence (including DNA) credible	Inconsistent witness statements, alleged shoddy investigation, defendant’s alternate account	Jury did not lose its way; DNA tied Curry to assault and credibility issues are for the jury
Sufficiency of the evidence	Evidence (DNA, victim testimony) sufficient to prove identity and elements	Identity not proven; some robbery victims not shown to have property taken; complicity issues	Identity proven by DNA; attempt suffices for aggravated robbery; complicity liability supported — evidence legally sufficient
Merger of kidnapping with attempted rape	Kidnapping should merge with attempted rape count	Kidnapping merged with rape at sentencing per defendant’s request; separate convictions supported by distinct conduct	Any error was invited by defendant’s sentencing choice; evidence did not require merger of all counts

State v. Haynes, 46 N.E.3d 1136 (8th Dist. 2015) (describing Crim.R. 6(F) requirements for an indictment to be "returned")
State ex rel. Collins v. O’Farrell, 61 Ohio St.3d 142 (Ohio 1991) (procedural requirements for grand jury indictment return)
State v. Jones, 69 N.E.3d 688 (Ohio 2016) (explaining due-process preindictment-delay standard and actual-prejudice requirement)
United States v. Marion, 404 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1971) (limitations on relief for preindictment delay; possibility of faded memories insufficient absent actual prejudice)
State v. Thompkins, 678 N.E.2d 541 (Ohio 1997) (standard for manifest-weight review)
State v. Jenks, 574 N.E.2d 492 (Ohio 1991) (legal-sufficiency standard — review evidence in light most favorable to prosecution)
State v. Adams, 45 N.E.3d 127 (Ohio 2015) (clarifying that speculative or inherent prejudice from delay is generally insufficient without demonstrable actual prejudice)