State v. Horne, 2011 Ohio 1901

Horne was charged in Summit County with aggravated robbery with a gun specification, having weapons while under disability, and grand theft, plus a gun specification.
The case originated with a juvenile court finding probable cause that Horne brandished a firearm during an aggravated robbery and transferring the case to the common pleas court for trial.
The State sought to admit evidence of Horne’s prior aggravated robbery with a handgun and kidnapping and the defense sought to exclude his nickname “Killer.”
Horne asserted an alibi (he was at home) and the State linked him to the offenses through a photo array and prior conduct.
A polygraph examination was jointly stipulated to be admissible, and the State introduced it along with testimony about the underlying facts of the prior conviction.
The jury convicted Horne on all counts and the trial court sentenced him to an aggregate nine-year term; the court later remanded on a sentencing defect regarding grand theft.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Admissibility of other acts evidence	Horne argues prior acts violated Evid.R. 404(B).	Horne contends admission prejudiced due to character evidence.	Abuse of discretion not shown; evidence was relevant and harmless overall.
Admission of journal entries in lieu of stipulation	State used journal entries to prove prior convictions.	Old Chief v. United States governs exclusion when only prior conviction is at issue.	No error; prior conviction evidence properly admitted under precedent.
Mistrial denial	Denial of mistrial relied on prosecutorial statements.	State’s opening statement improperly implied polygraph results.	No reversible error; the trial court’s rulings were within discretion.
Polygraph results admissibility and use	Polygraph results admitted for corroboration/impeachment per stipulation.	Results not admissible unless corroborating defendant’s testimony.	Properly admitted; admissibility governed by stipulation and existing precedent.
Use of the nickname 'Killer' to identify Horne	Nickname helped establish identity and development of the case.	Nickname was highly prejudicial and not relevant to identity.	Not plain error; use was permissible given context and hostile-witness procedure.
Manifest weight and sufficiency	Evidence supports guilt beyond reasonable doubt.	Weight-of-the-evidence favors acquittal.	Convictions are not against the manifest weight or the sufficiency of the evidence.

Souel, 53 Ohio St.2d 123 (Ohio 1978) (polygraph evidence admissible only with stipulation for corroboration/impeachment)
Conway, 109 Ohio St.3d 412 (Ohio 2006) (strict admissibility standard for other acts evidence; preserve for appeal)
Diar, 120 Ohio St.3d 460 (Ohio 2008) (abuse of discretion standard for evidentiary ruling; prejudice must be shown)
Williams, 6 Ohio St.3d 281 (Ohio 1983) (harmless error standard for constitutional errors)
Jackson, 57 Ohio St.3d 29 (Ohio 1991) (polygraph testimony admissibility and corroboration framework)
Souel, 53 Ohio St.2d 123 (Ohio 1978) (see above (duplicate to emphasize citation as authority))
Pelfrey, 112 Ohio St.3d 422 (Ohio 2007) (verbatim requirement for verdicts when aggravating elements present)
In re D.S., 111 Ohio St.3d 361 (Ohio 2006) (polygraph admissibility cited in context of corroboration)