State v. Zachary
2021 Ohio 2176
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2021Background
- Anthony Zachery was indicted for third-degree felony Domestic Violence (R.C. 2919.25), second-degree Felonious Assault (R.C. 2903.11(A)(2)), and misdemeanor Resisting Arrest (R.C. 2921.33) arising from an April 30, 2019 incident in which the victim, Christina Oller, testified Zachery hit her, dragged her, held a knife to her throat, and caused bruising and a cut.
- Oller texted a friend asking to "Call the cops now. He beat me to death," the friend called 911, and when officers arrived Oller hid then waved; officers located and detained Zachery after a struggle captured on dash-cam video.
- Police and a domestic violence shelter employee corroborated visible injuries (black eyes, bruising, cut to neck); no knife was recovered but the victim described a knife threat and officers observed a cut on Oller’s neck.
- The State introduced certified judgment entries of multiple prior domestic-violence convictions (used to elevate the current domestic-violence charge) and additional prior charges/convictions (e.g., resisting arrest, child endangering) that were not strictly necessary for enhancement.
- Zachery testified with an alternative account (accidental door/chair injuries, not assault or knife use) and admitted prior domestic-violence convictions in his testimony; the jury convicted him on all counts and the court imposed a merged sentence of 5–7.5 years for Felonious Assault and 60 days for Resisting Arrest (concurrent).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of prior acts / convictions beyond those needed for enhancement | State: prior domestic-violence convictions were elemental and admissible; records showed defendant identity and criminal history | Zachery: introduction of unrelated prior charges/convictions and officer references was improper other-acts evidence under Evid.R. 404 and unduly prejudicial | Court: some non-element convictions were inadmissibly admitted but error was harmless given overwhelming remaining evidence; admonished State to redact unrelated charges |
| Prosecutorial "golden rule" and emotional appeals (voir dire & closing) | State: questions sought juror views on victim-blaming and argument described facts to aid jurors’ understanding | Zachery: prosecutor asked jurors to imagine themselves as the victim and otherwise appealed to emotions, requiring reversal | Court: one closing "imagine" remark was improper but not prejudicial in context; no reversible misconduct or prejudice found |
| Use of prior misdemeanor convictions / impeachment on cross | State: asked defendant whether he disputed prior domestic-violence convictions to identify they existed for enhancement | Zachery: cross went beyond permissible proof of priors and improperly detailed past offenses | Court: State confined to confirming convictions; defendant himself testified to details; no plain error found |
| Ineffective assistance for failure to stipulate to priors | State: needed to prove priors for enhancement; counsel may reasonably litigate identification/validity rather than stipulate | Zachery: counsel should have stipulated to avoid prejudicial full records | Held: strategic choice; no showing of deficient performance or prejudice under Strickland |
| Sufficiency / manifest weight of evidence for Resisting Arrest | State: dash-cam and officer testimony showed defendant pulled away, ignored commands, and only ceased when taser threatened | Zachery: he was only detained (not under lawful arrest) and struggle was slight | Court: probable cause existed to detain/arrest based on 911 information and observations; dash-cam and testimony supported resisting conviction |
| Sufficiency / manifest weight of evidence for Felonious Assault (deadly weapon) | State: victim’s testimony and observed neck cut, plus her fear and contemporaneous texts, supported attempt using a knife | Zachery: no knife recovered; knife was a "scare tactic" and not pushed into throat | Court: victim testimony and injuries supported use/attempt with a deadly weapon; conviction supported |
| Officer/prosecutor opinion on ultimate issue | State: officer testimony and prosecutor comment summarized the facts | Zachery: officer saying defendant resisted and prosecutor calling the knife act "felonious assault, period" improperly expressed ultimate-issue opinions | Court: any opinion testimony was harmless because video/evidence plainly showed events; no reversible error |
Key Cases Cited
- Rigby v. Lake Cty., 58 Ohio St.3d 269 (Ohio 1991) (trial court has broad discretion on admissibility of evidence)
- State v. Issa, 93 Ohio St.3d 49 (Ohio 2001) (plain error standard and when reversal is required)
- State v. Long, 53 Ohio St.2d 91 (Ohio 1978) (plain error notice limited and to be applied cautiously)
- State v. Brooke, 113 Ohio St.3d 199 (Ohio 2007) (prior convictions that change degree of offense are elements the State must prove)
- Old Chief v. United States, 519 U.S. 172 (U.S. 1997) (limiting admission of prior-conviction records when a stipulation avoids unfair prejudice)
- State v. Creech, 150 Ohio St.3d 540 (Ohio 2016) (trial court should accept stipulation to prior conviction when offered to avoid unfair prejudice)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (two-prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- State v. Morris, 141 Ohio St.3d 399 (Ohio 2014) (harmless-error review for improper admission of Evid.R. 404(B) evidence)
- Jenks v. State, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (Ohio 1991) (standard for sufficiency review)
- Thompkins v. Ohio, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (Ohio 1997) (distinction between sufficiency and manifest-weight review)