State v. Frazier
2019 Ohio 2739
Ohio Ct. App.2019Background
- In 2017 Brandon Frazier (defendant), then 36, was charged with multiple sexual offenses for conduct in July 2014 involving A.F., his 13‑year‑old niece. Counts included rape (two convictions remained after one dismissal), attempted rape, kidnapping with sexual-motivation specification, and unlawful sexual conduct with a minor. Bench trial of prior‑conviction/repeat‑offender specifications; jury trial on substantive counts.
- A.F. testified Frazier lured her from her father’s house under the pretense of going to a store, drove to a house he had a key to, and sexually assaulted her (digital penetration, forced oral sex, and cunnilingus). She resisted, told him “no,” and later kept the assault secret for three years. She disclosed the assault to her mother in 2017.
- The state introduced A.F.’s testimony and text-message disclosures; no forensic evidence was recovered. The indictment alleged the offense occurred between July 2 and August 31, 2014.
- The jury convicted Frazier of the remaining counts; the trial court found him a repeat violent offender and sentenced him to a total of ten years’ imprisonment.
- Frazier appealed raising (1) insufficiency of evidence, (2) manifest-weight challenge, (3) plain error in jury instruction on force (reduced force standard for adult/child or authority relationship), and (4) ineffective assistance for failing to object to that instruction. The court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Sufficiency of evidence for rape/attempted rape | State: A.F.’s testimony and circumstances (age gap, resistance, deception, secrecy) establish force and sexual conduct beyond a reasonable doubt | Frazier: No proof of force or unwillingness; sexual acts were consensual | Held: Evidence sufficient—force established by positional authority, A.F.’s resistance, deception, and secrecy supported convictions |
| 2. Sufficiency of evidence for kidnapping | State: Deception and removal/restraint to facilitate sexual activity satisfied kidnapping element | Frazier: No unlawful removal or restraint; consensual interaction | Held: Evidence sufficient—luring to a different location and A.F.’s statement she could not leave satisfied kidnapping element |
| 3. Sufficiency of evidence for unlawful sexual conduct with a minor | State: Familial relationship and context support knowledge or recklessness about victim’s age | Frazier: Did not know A.F. was under 16 and was not reckless | Held: Evidence sufficient—uncle‑niece relationship supports that defendant knew or was reckless regarding age |
| 4. Jury instruction on force and counsel error | State: Instruction that force may be subtle for adult/child or authority relationships was proper and supported by evidence | Frazier: Instruction lowered the force standard; counsel ineffective for not objecting | Held: Instruction not plain error given evidence of authority and coercion; ineffective‑assistance claim moot and overruled |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (Ohio 1997) (distinguishes sufficiency and manifest‑weight review and standards)
- State v. Getsy, 84 Ohio St.3d 180 (Ohio 1998) (Jackson sufficiency standard applied)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (evidence sufficient if any rational trier of fact could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt)
- State v. Hill, 75 Ohio St.3d 195 (Ohio 1996) (reviewing sufficiency in favor of prosecution)
- State v. Dye, 82 Ohio St.3d 323 (Ohio 1998) (position of authority can supply force element in child‑victim sexual assaults)
- State v. Eskridge, 38 Ohio St.3d 56 (Ohio 1988) (consideration of relative authority and silence directives in evaluating force)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (two‑prong ineffective‑assistance standard)
- State v. DeHass, 10 Ohio St.2d 230 (Ohio 1967) (credibility and weight of evidence are for the trier of fact)
- State v. Antill, 176 Ohio St. 61 (Ohio 1964) (factfinder may accept or reject parts of testimony)