State v. Pleatman, 2016 Ohio 7659

In 2013 Jacqueline Pleatman contracted to buy a house from Grant Troja but later sought to cancel the sale; Troja sued for specific performance.
Pleatman sent multiple vitriolic emails to Troja and distributed flyers in his neighborhood recounting her version of events.
After Troja complained to the Indian Hill Rangers, Pleatman sent a December 15, 2014 email to Troja, his attorney, and his agent accusing Troja of being a “despicable specimen” and implying she could harm his relationship with Arby’s.
Pleatman later sent a “press release” to Arby’s criticizing Troja’s conduct; Troja filed a criminal complaint alleging telecommunications harassment.
A jury convicted Pleatman under R.C. 2917.21(B)(1) (telecommunications made with purpose to abuse, threaten, or harass); she appealed raising evidentiary, sufficiency/weight, and First Amendment challenges.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Admissibility of evidence about the underlying civil dispute	Evidence of underlying contract and lawsuit was irrelevant to harassment charge	Pleatman: excluded cross-examination about civil suit denied confrontation and was relevant to intent	Court: Exclusion proper; details of civil suit irrelevant to Pleatman’s intent; no abuse of discretion
Sufficiency and weight of evidence on intent to abuse/threaten/harass	State: email content, flyers, and press release show intent to harass and implied threats; sufficient evidence for conviction	Pleatman: email was attempt to settle dispute, not to harass; insufficient and conviction against weight of evidence	Court: Evidence was substantial and credible; verdict not against manifest weight; conviction affirmed
First Amendment challenge to R.C. 2917.21(B)(1)	State: statute applies and does not unconstitutionally prohibit protected speech as applied	Pleatman: statute violates her First Amendment right to communicate; statute unconstitutional as applied	Court: Issue waived for failure to properly raise at trial; declined to reach merits; no plain-error relief granted

Leslie v. State, 14 Ohio App.3d 343 (Ohio Ct. App. 1984) (cross-examination may be limited where questions concern irrelevant matters)
Lang v. State, 129 Ohio St.3d 512 (Ohio 2011) (trial-court evidentiary rulings reviewed for abuse of discretion)
Ellison v. State, 178 Ohio App.3d 734 (Ohio Ct. App. 2008) (intent to harass requires intent to alarm or cause substantial emotional distress)
Jenks v. State, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (Ohio 1991) (standard for sufficiency review of criminal convictions)
Thompkins v. State, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (Ohio 1997) (standard for manifest-weight review)
Awan v. State, 22 Ohio St.3d 120 (Ohio 1986) (constitutional challenges must be raised at trial or are waived)