State v. Zeber, 2017 Ohio 8987

On a snowy January morning 2015, officers found an unconscious, naked female (N.C.) with injuries consistent with being dragged across asphalt; officers observed drag and heel marks and severe back injuries.
Officer Moledor testified he observed Nathan Zeber dragging N.C. by the legs toward a damaged vehicle; N.C. later told police she had been in a vehicle accident, used heroin, and recalled last “making out” with J.G.
Zeber was charged in Stow Municipal Court with first-degree misdemeanor assault, tried in a bench trial, found guilty, and sentenced (jail time and part of fine suspended, 12 months community control).
At trial Zeber testified J.G. — not he — dragged N.C., and he equivocated about whether he made the 911 call; the prosecutor played (but did not introduce) a 911 recording during cross-exam.
Zeber, proceeding pro se on appeal, claimed ineffective assistance of trial counsel for failing to disclose or object to a purported transcript/recording and argued a written statement to police should have been excluded for lack of Miranda warnings.
The appeals court reviewed the record, declined to consider allegations based on off-record communications or evidence not admitted, and affirmed the conviction.

Issue	Zeber's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Whether Zeber received ineffective assistance because counsel failed to disclose or challenge a 911 recording/transcript	Counsel failed to share the recording/transcript pre-trial and failed to object at trial; had the recording been attributed to J.G., Zeber would be exonerated	Counsel’s conduct falls within trial tactics; allegations rely on off-record matters and evidence outside the record; even if excluded, other overwhelming evidence supports conviction	Denied — claim rests on matters outside the record or on reasonable tactical decisions; no demonstrated prejudice
Whether Zeber’s written statement should have been excluded for lack of Miranda warnings	Statement should be excluded because he was not under suspicion/arrest and was not advised of rights	Record does not show the statement was admitted; appellant failed to preserve or include the statement in the record	Denied — appellant fails to identify the statement in the record or develop the argument; exclusion claim not preserved/supported

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (Ineffective-assistance standard: deficient performance + prejudice)
Bradley, 42 Ohio St.3d 136 (Ohio test for ineffective assistance)
Gondor, 112 Ohio St.3d 377 (presumption licensed counsel competent)
Conway, 109 Ohio St.3d 412 (failure to exclude evidence non-prejudicial where other evidence supports conviction)
Eggeman, 2015-Ohio-5177 (discussed as appellate limitation — included in opinion as Ohio App. decision)

(Note: the opinion also cites several Ohio appellate decisions for procedural and preservation principles.)