State v. Smith
2016 Ohio 5512
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Defendant Ronald O. Smith was charged with rape, kidnapping with a sexual-motivation specification, and witness intimidation; jury convicted him of sexual battery (lesser included offense) and kidnapping with sexual motivation; intimidation charge acquitted.
- Incident: victim A.Y. testified Smith, after being invited to her apartment, took her wrists, led/forced her to a bedroom floor, removed her clothing, put his weight on her so she could not move, and had intercourse despite her repeated “no”s; she reported promptly, called rape crisis, 911, underwent SANE exam.
- Trial evidence included A.Y.’s testimony, 911 tape, officer and SANE nurse observations, family testimony about A.Y.’s changed demeanor, and text/phone records.
- Defense sought to impeach A.Y. with an earlier videotaped statement (transcript) alleging inconsistencies about number of texts/calls and residence; trial court reviewed the transcript on the record and excluded extrinsic impeachment as immaterial or not inconsistent.
- Defendant raised five appellate assignments of error: (1) ineffective assistance for failure to object to alleged improper victim-impact testimony; (2) trial court erred by excluding prior inconsistent statement; (3) ineffective assistance for failing to preserve transcript for appeal; (4) insufficiency of evidence; (5) convictions against manifest weight.
- Court affirmed convictions, holding (inter alia) the trial court did not abuse discretion on exclusion of prior statement, victim-impact testimony was probative of trauma, counsel’s performance was not deficient or prejudicial, and the evidence was sufficient and not against manifest weight.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Smith) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of prior inconsistent statement (Evid.R. 613) | Court: prior statement reviewed; alleged inconsistencies were not material or not inconsistent | Smith: transcript showed inconsistencies re: texts, calls, and prior address that impeach credibility | Trial court did not abuse discretion; exclusion proper because statements were immaterial or not inconsistent |
| Victim-impact / post-offense trauma testimony admissibility | State: testimony about counseling, changed demeanor and trauma is probative of facts attendant to sexual assault | Smith: such testimony was improper victim-impact evidence and prejudicial | Testimony about psychological trauma was relevant and probative to the offenses; not unfairly prejudicial |
| Ineffective assistance for failure to object or preserve record | State: counsel made on-record objections and argued alleged inconsistencies at sidebar; record sufficient | Smith: counsel failed to object to victim-impact testimony and failed to proffer the full videotape transcript for appeal | Strickland not met: counsel’s performance not shown deficient or prejudicial; on-record sidebar review preserved issues despite no full transcript proffer |
| Sufficiency and manifest weight of the evidence re: sexual battery and kidnapping | State: victim’s testimony, SANE, 911, officer observations and family testimony suffice to prove coercion/force, restraint, and sexual motivation | Smith: victim was intoxicated, inconsistent about relationship/history, and some actions were “gentle,” so evidence insufficient or jury lost its way | Viewing the evidence favorably to prosecution, a rational juror could find coercion, force, and restraint; convictions are supported and not against manifest weight |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (ineffective assistance standard)
- Jenks, State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (sufficiency standard review)
- Thompkins, State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (manifest weight standard)
- DeHass, State v. DeHass, 10 Ohio St.2d 230 (credibility and factfinder role)
- Powell, State v. Powell, 132 Ohio St.3d 233 (victim-impact and facts attendant to offense)
- Williams, State v. Williams, 99 Ohio St.3d 439 (when victim circumstances are relevant)
- Johnson, State v. Johnson, 112 Ohio St.3d 210 (no corroboration required for sexual assault conviction)