State v. Weber, 2013 Ohio 3172

Weber was convicted by jury of multiple rape counts involving his step-daughter A.H., spanning ages from around 7 to 11; sentences totaled 25 years to life plus a Tier III sex-offender designation.
Initially, Weber faced three rape counts (less than 13) and a gross sexual imposition, with two more rape counts (less than 10) added in a later indictment.
During trial, two counts from the initial indictment and the gross sexual imposition charge were dismissed; Weber was convicted on the remaining counts.
A.H. testified about grooming, sexual touching, oral sex, vaginal intercourse, and Weber urging secrecy; medical and counseling witnesses discussed abuse indicators.
The State sought to amend the second indictment’s venue language to reflect different counties (Cuyahoga and Franklin) as part of a continuing course of conduct; the trial court overruled objections and allowed the amendments.
Weber raises multiple assignments of error alleging improper amendment of the indictment, venue concerns, ineffective assistance of counsel on venue, admissibility of expert testimony, and sufficiency of the evidence; the court rejects these challenges and affirms the conviction.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Crim.R.7(D) amendment and venue change allowed?	Weber contends amendment changed the crime’s venue identity.	Weber argues amendment alters the indictment’s identity and risks conviction on evidence not presented to grand jury.	Amendment did not change the offense identity; venue proper under course of conduct doctrine.
Venue for count I of the second indictment established?	Montgomery County venue valid due to course of conduct.	Venue defect not proven; challenge to venue should fail.	Venue proper under R.C. 2901.12(H); plain error not shown.
Ineffective assistance for failing to move to dismiss for lack of venue?	Weber’s counsel failed Crim.R. 29 motion to challenge venue.	Counsel’s omission prejudiced Weber.	No ineffective assistance; Weber not prejudiced; venue properly established.
Admissibility of expert child psychologist testimony?	Miceli’s testimony aided understanding of abuse dynamics.	Testimony improperly vouched for credibility of the child.	Admissible; did not usurp jury function; no due process violation.
Sufficiency of evidence for venue-related count?	Evidence supported multiple venue locations.	Evidence failed to place county for count II beyond reasonable doubt.	Evidence sufficient; counts supported by course of conduct and venue findings.

State v. Vitale, 96 Ohio App.3d 695 (8th Dist. 1994) (amendment altering venue can be reversible if identity of charge changes)
State v. Honeycutt, 2002-Ohio-3490 (2d Dist. Montgomery 2002) (amendment not changing crime identity; may require continuance)