State v. Persley
2017 Ohio 8342
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- In March 2000 a woman (victim) was attacked in a Toledo parking lot: struck from behind, threatened, forcibly raped, and suffered bruising and a 3 mm tear to her external genitalia; she did not identify her assailant at the scene.
- Evidence recovered after a sexual-assault exam included the victim’s coat and swabs; forensic testing of a stain on the coat produced sperm and non-sperm DNA that BCI reported matched appellant, Willie Persley, Jr., as the major source.
- Appellant lived in an apartment complex adjacent to the parking lot and admitted parking there around the time of the incident.
- A jury convicted Persley of first-degree rape (R.C. 2907.02(A)(2)); he was sentenced to nine years imprisonment plus five years postrelease control.
- On appeal Persley raised three issues: ineffective assistance of counsel (challenging trial counsel’s handling of the DNA evidence and BCI scandal), denial of a Crim.R. 29 motion/sufficiency of the evidence, and that the conviction was against the manifest weight of the evidence.
- The Sixth District Court of Appeals affirmed, finding counsel’s strategic choices were not shown to be prejudicial and that the DNA and circumstantial evidence were legally sufficient and supported the jury’s verdict.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance of counsel | Persley: counsel failed to call a DNA expert and did not investigate or cross-examine regarding a 2016 BCI scandal, depriving him of effective assistance | State: counsel pursued reasonable strategy; absence of specific prejudice or alternative evidence showing different outcome | Court: No ineffective assistance — failure to call expert was a strategic decision and Persley showed no prejudice |
| Sufficiency of the evidence / Crim.R. 29 denial | Persley: evidence insufficient to prove he committed rape beyond a reasonable doubt | State: DNA and circumstantial evidence (coat stain, residence/parking proximity, victim injuries) sufficiently linked Persley to the assault | Court: Evidence sufficient; a rational trier of fact could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt |
| Manifest weight of the evidence | Persley: conviction against manifest weight; jury should not have credited the State’s proof | State: credible physical, forensic, and circumstantial evidence supports verdict | Court: Not an exceptional case; weight of credible evidence supports the conviction |
Key Cases Cited
- Hester v. State, 45 Ohio St.2d 71 (trial fairness/ineffective assistance standard under Ohio law)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (federal two-part ineffective assistance test)
- Calhoun v. State, 86 Ohio St.3d 279 (assessing prejudice in ineffective-assistance claims)
- Thompkins v. City of Cleveland, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (sufficiency standard and appellate review)
- State v. Smith, 80 Ohio St.3d 89 (definition of sufficiency review; evidence viewed in light most favorable to prosecution)
- State v. Walker, 55 Ohio St.2d 208 (appellate courts do not weigh evidence or assess credibility on sufficiency review)
- Eastley v. Volkman, 132 Ohio St.3d 328 (manifest-weight standard; appellate court as thirteenth juror)
- State v. Martin, 20 Ohio App.3d 172 (standard for ordering new trial when verdict is against manifest weight)
- Williams v. State, 74 Ohio App.3d 686 (failure to call witness as trial strategy generally not ineffective assistance)