State v. Watson, 2012 Ohio 1624

K.T. is the half-sister of one of Watson's children and spent every other weekend at his home during her childhood.
Watson began making sexual remarks to K.T. and eventually engaged in a sexual relationship with her when she was a teenager.
When K.T. turned 18, she moved out and disclosed the relationship to her cousin, who encouraged reporting to police.
Detective Hackbart asked K.T. to make a one-party consent call to Watson and record it, which K.T. did.
Watson was indicted for unlawful sexual conduct with a minor and sexual battery; a jury found him guilty on both counts; the court merged the unlawful conduct conviction and imposed a five-year sentence.
Watson appeals, asserting two assignments of error.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence for penetration	Watson argues there was no evidence of penetration	Watson contends no penetration was proven beyond reasonable doubt	Evidence sufficient; penetration implied by testimony and cunnilingus included in statute
Admissibility of other-acts testimony	State offered cousins' testimony to show pattern of sexual misconduct	Evidence should be excluded under Evid.R. 404(B) as improper character evidence	Harmless error; overwhelming proof of guilt via recorded admission and KT's testimony

State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (1991) (standard for sufficiency of evidence: whether any rational trier could find guilt beyond reasonable doubt)
State v. Williams, 6 Ohio St.3d 281 (1983) (harmless-error principle for evidentiary errors when guilt is overwhelming)
State v. Horne, 2011-Ohio-1901 (2011) (admission of 404(B) evidence reviewed for abuse of discretion or de novo; harmless error analysis applied)
State v. Morris, 2011-Ohio-1618 (2011) (standard of review for evidentiary 404(B) admissibility; Supreme Court accepted review)