State v. Heald
2022 Ohio 2282
Ohio Ct. App.2022Background
- Marcus E. Heald was charged with Assault (R.C. 2903.13(A)) and Disorderly Conduct after an incident on May 16, 2021; complaint filed June 15, 2021.
- Victim Sheri Thompson testified Heald ran onto a porch and punched her in the face; officer observed slight bruising.
- Neighbor Nickole Doss recorded the incident and testified she saw a Caucasian male run up behind the Black woman at the doorway; Doss did not personally identify participants in court.
- At the September 27, 2021 bench trial, Officer Hughes testified about videos and out-of-court statements; defense objected on hearsay grounds.
- The municipal court found Heald guilty of Assault, merged the disorderly-conduct count, sentenced him (180 days, 150 suspended, 12 months community control), and Heald appealed raising four errors.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility / hearsay | Officer Hughes’ testimony about videos and statements was admissible and harmless | Officer’s testimony introduced hearsay on essential elements and should have been excluded | No reversible error; judge presumed to disregard any improper hearsay; some statements were the defendant’s own (not hearsay) and other testimony cured any prejudice |
| Sufficiency / manifest weight of evidence | Thompson’s in-court testimony and observed bruising sufficed to prove assault beyond a reasonable doubt | Heald acted in defense of another (Scheibelhoffer) | Conviction affirmed; evidence sufficient and weight does not favor defendant; defense-of-another not supported by the record |
| Denial of Crim.R. 29 motion | Court properly denied Rule 29 because Thompson’s testimony created a factual question for the trier of fact | Motion should have been granted for insufficiency of evidence | Denial proper—testimony established enough to submit case to the court as factfinder |
| Ineffective assistance (failure to call Scheibelhoffer) | N/A (State opposed claim) | Trial counsel was ineffective for not calling Scheibelhoffer to show Heald acted to defend her | No ineffective assistance; defendant failed to show what the witness would have testified or resulting prejudice |
Key Cases Cited
- Rigby v. Lake Cty., 58 Ohio St.3d 269 (1991) (trial court has broad discretion on admissibility)
- State v. Wuensch, 102 N.E.3d 1089 (Ohio 2017) (presumption that judge in bench trial disregards improper hearsay)
- Columbus v. Guthmann, 175 Ohio St. 282 (1963) (same presumption for trial judges)
- State v. Leonard, 104 Ohio St.3d 54 (2004) (defendant’s out-of-court statements not hearsay when offered against him)
- State v. Ricks, 136 Ohio St.3d 356 (2013) (statements may be admissible to explain investigative activity)
- State v. White, 15 Ohio St.2d 146 (1968) (presumption judge considered only competent evidence)
- State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (1991) (sufficiency-of-evidence standard)
- State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (1997) (distinguishes sufficiency and weight of evidence)
- State v. Petway, 156 N.E.3d 467 (2020) (defense-of-another requires evidence that "tends to support" use of force in defense of another)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-prong standard for ineffective assistance of counsel)