State v. Petty, 2017 Ohio 1062

Background

In July 2014, 12-year-old C.A. communicated via the Badoo app with an account identified as "Thai;" C.A. and Mathias Petty met that evening at her aunt’s porch where C.A. alleges she performed oral sex on Petty after he exposed his penis. C.A.’s mother observed and intervened.
Petty was indicted for rape (R.C. 2907.02(A)(1)(b)) and importuning (R.C. 2907.07(A)); the rape count carried a repeat violent offender specification based on a prior aggravated robbery conviction.
At trial, prosecution presented testimony from C.A., her mother, officers, hospital personnel, and DNA testing (which showed no foreign DNA); Petty testified that C.A. appeared older, that they had sexual messages on Badoo, and denied that oral sex occurred on the porch.
Defense objected at trial to Officer Schulz testifying about the Badoo/text messages (hearsay / foundation / best-evidence concerns); the court overruled and allowed testimony, treating disputes as for cross-examination and weight.
The jury convicted Petty of rape and importuning and found the repeat violent offender specification true. The court sentenced Petty to an indefinite 10 years to life for rape, plus 3 years for the specification and 24 months for importuning, all consecutive; the trial court ordered consecutive service to an unrelated sentence in a separate case.
On appeal Petty raised four issues: admission of the messages, sufficiency of evidence as to the repeat violent offender specification, manifest-weight challenge, and challenges to sentencing (including merger and consecutive-sentence findings).

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Admissibility of Badoo/text-message testimony	Messages were admissible; victim testified and messages relevant to contact and solicitation	Testimony about messages was hearsay/totem-pole hearsay, lacked foundation and violated best-evidence rule	Court held messages were admissible as party-opponent admissions and any foundation/best-evidence concerns went to weight; no plain error shown
Sufficiency of evidence for repeat violent offender specification	Rape qualifies as an "offense of violence" under R.C.; prior conviction stipulates predicate	Argued lack of proof of force/violence to make rape an offense of violence	Court held sufficiency satisfied: rape is listed in R.C. as an offense of violence and prior conviction established repeat-violent status
Manifest weight of evidence (guilt on rape and importuning)	State relied on victim and mother testimony, hospital interview and victim ID; jurors could credit inconsistencies	Argued inconsistencies, lack of DNA, and initial denials made convictions against manifest weight	Court found credible evidence (including eyewitness mother, victim testimony, and Petty’s admissions about solicitation) supported convictions; not against manifest weight
Sentencing: merger and consecutive sentences/proportionality	State: importuning and rape are distinct acts (solicitation then sexual conduct); consecutive sentences appropriate with statutory findings	Petty: offenses should merge under R.C. 2941.25; trial court failed to make required proportionality finding for consecutive sentences	Court held rape and importuning are not allied (separate conduct and harm) and indefinite term for rape was proper, but trial court failed to explicitly make the proportionality finding required by R.C. 2929.14(C)(4); remand for resentencing on consecutive findings

Key Cases Cited

State v. Barnes, 94 Ohio St.3d 21 (Ohio 2002) (plain-error standard and caution for appellate notice)
State v. Long, 53 Ohio St.2d 91 (Ohio 1978) (plain-error framework)
State v. Murphy, 91 Ohio St.3d 516 (Ohio 2001) (contemporaneous-objection rule)
State v. Ruff, 143 Ohio St.3d 114 (Ohio 2015) (framework for allied-offenses analysis under R.C. 2941.25)
State v. Bonnell, 140 Ohio St.3d 209 (Ohio 2014) (requirements for sentencing court to make consecutive-sentence findings on record)
State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (Ohio 1997) (manifest-weight standard)
State v. Blankenship, 145 Ohio St.3d 221 (Ohio 2015) (application of indefinite sentence for rape of a young victim)