State v. Mathes
2013 Ohio 4128
Ohio Ct. App.2013Background
- Appellant James David Mathes was indicted in Clermont County in August 2011 on rape, unlawful restraint, kidnapping, and tampering with evidence for an alleged June 4, 2010 assault on a 14-year-old neighbor, A.C.
- At trial in February 2012, A.C. testified that Mathes pinned her on a couch, touched her shorts, and digitized penetrated her vagina; DNA analyst Draper testified DNA from under Mathes' fingernails matched A.C.'s DNA.
- Mathes testified he had no contact with A.C.; he suggested she may have transferred DNA while handling clothing; the jury convicted him of rape, kidnapping, and unlawful restraint.
- The trial court sentenced Mathes to five years in prison for rape after finding allied offenses of similar import; a new trial motion was denied.
- Mathes' direct appeal was affirmed by this court on April 29, 2013, in State v. Mathes, 2013-Ohio-1732.
- On December 6, 2012, Mathes filed a postconviction relief petition seeking to vacate the judgment and for appointment of a DNA testing expert; the trial court denied without a hearing on January 16, 2013.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether denial of postconviction relief without a hearing was proper | Mathes argued trial counsel was unprepared to impeach A.C., affecting trial result | Mathes contends the Incident Run report and impeachment evidence were unavailable but could have altered the verdict | No reversible error; denials upheld; res judicata bars review without new evidence |
| Whether denial without a hearing was warranted for claims of counsel unprepared and trial judge aware beforehand | Sister allegedly informed court of counsel's unpreparedness and requested continuance | Claims lack evidentiary support; no record of the call or authority to request continuance | No abuse of discretion; res judicata bars; petition properly denied without hearing |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Dillingham, 2012-Ohio-5841 (Ohio 2012) (postconviction review requires substantial operative facts; abuse of discretion standard)
- State v. Calhoun, 86 Ohio St.3d 279 (Ohio 1999) (res judicata bars postconviction claims not raised on direct appeal)
- State v. Vore, 2013-Ohio-1490 (Ohio 2013) (evidentiary hearing not automatic; trial court's decision reviewed for abuse of discretion)
- State v. Wagers, 2012-Ohio-2258 (Ohio 2012) (res judicata bars postconviction relief claims that could have been raised on direct appeal)
- State v. Szefcyk, 77 Ohio St.3d 93 (Ohio 1996) (syllabus on postconviction procedures and procedural bars)
- State v. Cole, 2 Ohio St.3d 112 (Ohio 1982) (scope of postconviction relief and procedural requirements)
- State v. Lawson, 103 Ohio App.3d 307 (Ohio App.3d 1995) (exception to res judicata when outside-record evidence exists)
