State v. Howard
2018 Ohio 3692
Ohio Ct. App.2018Background
- Charles Howard and Tasha Halbert were formerly in a long-term relationship and had three children; Halbert obtained a temporary civil protection order prohibiting Howard from contacting her.
- The protection order, issued under R.C. 3113.31 and journalized September 24, 2015, prohibited electronic contact including social media and was effective through September 24, 2016.
- In June 2016 Halbert received multiple Facebook Messenger contacts (messages, missed calls, photos, and a sexually explicit photo) from an account showing Howard’s photo and the name "Chakahn Glory Howard."
- Halbert testified she logged into her Facebook, took and printed screenshots of the Messenger exchanges, and identified the communications as coming from Howard based on content, his photo, and his history of harassment.
- Howard represented himself at a bench trial, objected to admission of the screenshots as unauthenticated, presented a girlfriend who confirmed he had a Facebook account but did not observe the messages, and was found guilty of recklessly violating the protection order.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility/authentication of Facebook screenshots | Screenshots were taken and printed by the victim who could identify them as accurate depictions of her Messenger, satisfying Evid.R. 901(A) | Screenshots were not properly authenticated as messages sent by Howard | Court: Admission proper; prima facie authentication met and defendant offered no rebuttal |
| Sufficiency of evidence that Howard sent the messages | Victim’s credible testimony tied the account (photo, name change, message content, history) to Howard; girlfriend’s testimony did not refute direct ID | Argued insufficient proof that Howard was the sender of the Facebook contacts | Court: Evidence sufficient when viewed in light most favorable to prosecution; conviction affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Jenks v. Ohio, 61 Ohio St.3d 259, 574 N.E.2d 492 (1991) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
- Zenith Radio Corp. v. Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co., 505 F. Supp. 1190 (E.D. Pa. 1980) (discussing threshold for authentication of documents)