State v. Starkey, 2017 Ohio 7946

Victim K.C. alleged that on Aug. 7–8, 2013, Starkey assaulted, threatened with a knife, and raped her twice (once in Wooster, once in Geneva-on-the-Lake), and forced her to travel with him to avoid witnesses.
K.C. testified to choking, blows to the face, whipping with a carved bow, sexual assaults (anal and oral) at knifepoint, and threats to kill her; photos of injuries were admitted.
K.C. delayed reporting until Aug. 2015 after learning Starkey was jailed for murder; she and others testified to post‑assault personality changes and fear.
Starkey denied the assaults, offered alternate explanations (K.C. self‑harm; he did not accompany her to Geneva), and presented an alibi witness.
Grand jury indicted Starkey on nine counts (kidnapping, rape, felonious assault, intimidation, domestic violence); jury convicted on all counts; trial court imposed consecutive sentences totaling 35 years.
On appeal, Starkey challenged (1) sufficiency of evidence, (2) manifest weight of the evidence, and (3) the trial court’s findings supporting consecutive sentences under R.C. 2929.14(C)(4).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence to support convictions (kidnapping, rape, felonious assault, intimidation)	State: K.C.’s testimony and corroborating evidence (photos, Facebook message) prove elements beyond a reasonable doubt	Starkey: K.C.’s delay in reporting, self‑harm history, and contradictory witness testimony undermine sufficiency	Convictions supported; testimony, photos, and message suffice for a rational jury to find guilt beyond reasonable doubt
Manifest weight of the evidence	State: jury credibility determinations supported by record; evidence consistent with K.C.’s account	Starkey: evidence weighs against verdict due to delay in reporting, alternate explanations, and alibi witness	Not against manifest weight; jury did not lose its way — evidence does not overwhelmingly contradict verdict
Sentencing — whether trial court made required R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) findings for consecutive terms	State: trial court made findings at sentencing hearing and in judgment entry (necessary to protect public, not disproportionate, and statutory subsections)	Starkey: trial court failed to include required consecutive‑sentence findings in the judgment entry	Judgment entry contained the requisite findings (including (b) and (c)); consecutive sentences upheld

State v. Jones, 91 Ohio St.3d 335 (discussing sufficiency/review standards)
State v. Eley, 56 Ohio St.2d 169 (standard for substantial evidence)
State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (approved sufficiency review framework)
State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (manifest‑weight standard)
State v. DeHass, 10 Ohio St.2d 230 (credibility and jury determinations)
State v. Bonnell, 140 Ohio St.3d 209 (requirements for consecutive‑sentence findings)