State v. Reese
2016 Ohio 557
Ohio Ct. App.2016Background
- On Sept. 16, 2011, Joshua Davis was shot and killed during an attempted theft of marijuana; Lamar Reese was indicted for aggravated murder and aggravated robbery with firearm specifications.
- A cooperating participant, Aaron Triplett, testified that Reese and another man pointed guns at the victim and shots were fired; Triplett had a non-prosecution agreement in exchange for testimony.
- Reese and the State stipulated that Reese would take a polygraph; if he failed the State could use the results at trial; Reese failed and the polygraph results were admitted at trial.
- A jury convicted Reese of aggravated murder and aggravated robbery; the court sentenced him to an aggregate 33 years-to-life and he appealed.
- Reese raised two plain-error assignments: (1) the trial court’s jury instruction about the polygraph testimony improperly went beyond Souel; and (2) the polygraph testimony lacked the Evid.R. 702 foundation for expert/scientific evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the jury instruction about admitted polygraph results complied with State v. Souel | The instruction correctly explained polygraph evidence is not proof of elements but may be used to test defendant's credibility and tracked Ohio Jury Instructions | The instruction improperly went beyond Souel by telling jurors the polygraph could be used to assess truthfulness/credibility | Court held no plain error: instruction complied with Souel and matched Ohio Jury Instructions, thus correct statement of law |
| Whether the polygraph testimony required an Evid.R. 702 showing of scientific reliability | The State relied on Souel’s four-part standard and presented the examiner’s qualifications, test conditions, and cross-examination — satisfying admissibility under Souel | Reese argued the State failed to establish general scientific reliability under Evid.R. 702(C) and that test anomalies made the result unreliable | Court held no plain error: Souel governs polygraph admissibility in Ohio; Souel’s conditions were satisfied; Evid.R. 702(C) proof of general scientific reliability was not required because polygraph admissibility is limited to stipulation per Souel/Davis |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Souel, 53 Ohio St.2d 123 (establishes four Souel conditions for admitting stipulated polygraph evidence)
- State v. Davis, 62 Ohio St.3d 326 (recognizes polygraph tests are not generally viewed as scientifically reliable; admissibility limited by stipulation)
- State v. Long, 53 Ohio St.2d 91 (defines plain error standard)
- State v. Waddell, 75 Ohio St.3d 163 (clarifies plain error requires showing different outcome but for the error)