2022 Ohio 4627
Ohio Ct. App.2022Background
- Defendant Robert Harrison lived with partner B.W. and her two minor children, T.W. and N.F.; in October 2019 T.W. disclosed sexual abuse by Harrison and CARE House interviews implicated N.F. as well.
- November 2019 and June 2020 indictments charged Harrison with multiple counts including rape, sexual battery, gross sexual imposition (GSI), unlawful sexual conduct with a minor, and disseminating matter harmful to juveniles.
- 2021 jury trial: guilty verdicts on four counts of gross sexual imposition (two related to T.W., two to N.F.); acquittals on some counts; jury deadlocked on others, prompting a mistrial on several rape and sexual-battery counts.
- Before retrial on mistried counts, Harrison pleaded no contest to three additional GSI counts by bill of information in exchange for dismissal of the remaining eight charged counts; parties agreed to an aggregate 8–9 year sentence and the court imposed nine years.
- On appeal Harrison raised: (1) sufficiency/Crim.R. 29 attack on the rape-under-13 count; (2) Crim.R. 29/venue challenge to two counts involving N.F.; and (3) objection to admission of rebuttal testimony (Evid.R. 613(B)) from Jaynee Hall and the court’s failure to give a limiting instruction.
- The appellate court affirmed: the Crim.R. 29 arguments were moot given acquittals/dismissals, and although the trial court erred by not giving a limiting instruction for impeachment testimony, that error did not satisfy plain-error reversal standards.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crim.R. 29 sufficiency re: rape of a child under 13 | State presented sufficient evidence; trial court properly denied Crim.R. 29 | Harrison argued record lacked proof T.W. was under 13 when conduct occurred | Moot — jury deadlocked and count later dismissed in plea; no remedy, assignment overruled |
| Crim.R. 29 / venue for counts involving N.F. (unlawful sexual conduct & sexual battery) | State presented sufficient venue evidence | Harrison argued State failed to prove venue | Moot — jury acquitted on those counts; assignment overruled |
| Admission of rebuttal witness Hall under Evid.R. 613(B) and failure to give limiting instruction | State: Hall’s testimony admissible to impeach Willman’s prior inconsistent statements under Evid.R. 613(B) | Harrison: testimony was prejudicial, collateral, and should be excluded or limited; limiting instruction required | Foundation for extrinsic impeachment established; trial court erred by not giving limiting instruction, but plain-error review finds no prejudice warranting reversal; assignment overruled |
Key Cases Cited
- Williams v. Ohio, 74 Ohio St.3d 569, 660 N.E.2d 724 (setting principles on harmless-error and related standards)
- Barnes v. Ohio, 94 Ohio St.3d 21, 759 N.E.2d 1240 (articulating plain-error review framework)
- Rogers v. Ohio, 143 Ohio St.3d 385, 38 N.E.3d 860 (clarifying when an error affects substantial rights under plain-error review)
- Hancock v. Ohio, 108 Ohio St.3d 57, 840 N.E.2d 1032 (discussion of abuse-of-discretion standard for evidentiary rulings)
- McKelton v. Ohio, 148 Ohio St.3d 261, 70 N.E.3d 508 (prior inconsistent statements generally admissible only for impeachment)