2016 Ohio 3453
Ohio Ct. App.2016Background
- Defendant Matthew Truhlar was indicted in July 2013 for crimes (rape, gross sexual imposition, kidnapping) based on a 1993 assault; DNA from a 1993 rape kit matched Truhlar in April 2013. He pleaded not guilty and waived a jury trial.
- The state presented the victim, the 1993 investigating officer, and a cold-case investigator; the victim testified to the assault but gave limited details and could not identify her attacker in a photo array.
- The state had difficulty obtaining the victim’s 1993 medical records because St. Alexis Hospital closed and St. Vincent Charity (and its vendor Healthport) could not locate the records; the records were produced to the prosecutor during/near the end of trial.
- After both sides rested and closing arguments were made, the state moved to supplement the record with the medical records; defendant moved for a mistrial and renewed a preindictment-delay motion.
- The trial court held a hearing, granted a mistrial, and dismissed the case with prejudice, finding that the hospital/Healthport had been dilatory and that the delay (including late testing of the rape kit) prejudiced Truhlar’s right to a fair trial.
- On appeal the State challenged dismissal with prejudice and the attribution of the hospital’s failure to the State; Truhlar’s cross-appeal challenged the denial of his mistrial motion (moot because the court ultimately granted a mistrial).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court abused its discretion by dismissing the case | State: court could/must dismiss without prejudice, not with prejudice | Truhlar: dismissal with prejudice appropriate given unfairness and delay | Court: dismissal affirmed but dismissal with prejudice reversed — should be without prejudice |
| Whether dismissal with prejudice was justified by preindictment delay | State: trial court erred to the extent it relied on preindictment delay to bar retrial | Truhlar: delay (and lost records) prejudiced defense, warranting prejudice dismissal | Court: trial court did not dismiss for preindictment delay; rejection of preindictment-delay basis — no reversible error on that ground |
| Whether the court could impute hospital/vendor delay to the State and bar retrial under double jeopardy | State: hospital/Healthport failures shouldn’t be treated as State misconduct to bar retrial | Truhlar: State bears burden and hospital delay attributable to State, supporting dismissal with prejudice | Court: imputing hospital delay to the State was not an abuse, but there was no evidence of prosecutorial intent to provoke mistrial — so mistrial does not bar retrial |
| Whether the trial court should have allowed the State to reopen the case to admit the medical records | State: court could have permitted reopening under trial-procedure rules and Evid.R.611 | Truhlar: reopening after closing would be unfair given years of delay and late production | Court: refusal to reopen was within the court’s sound discretion and not an abuse of discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Treesh, 90 Ohio St.3d 460 (2001) (standard: mistrial rulings rest in trial court's discretion)
- Oregon v. Kennedy, 456 U.S. 667 (1982) (double jeopardy bars retrial only where prosecutorial misconduct is intended to provoke mistrial)
- Nakoff v. Fairview Gen. Hosp., 75 Ohio St.3d 254 (1996) (abuse-of-discretion standard described as review deferential to trial court)
- State v. Loza, 71 Ohio St.3d 61 (1994) (general rule that mistrial usually permits retrial)
- State v. Bonnell, 140 Ohio St.3d 209 (2014) (trial court may correct clerical omissions nunc pro tunc to reflect what occurred at hearing)