State v. SmithState v. Smith
- Reporters:
- , , ,
- Before:
- Shannon
This cause came on to be heard upon the appeal; the transcript of the docket and journal entries; the original papers and pleadings from the County Court of Clermоnt County; and the transcript of the proceedings, the assignments of error, and the briefs and argumеnts of counsel.
The appeal is from the judgment and sentence entered and pronоunced upon the verdict of a jury finding the appellant guilty of a violation of R. C. 4507.38 (Restriction against driving when license suspended, etc.) on August 24, 1976.
The first and second assignments intermesh and are considered to raise a single issue. The assignments state:
“I. The trial court erred in admitting State’s exhibits one and two in contravention of the best evidence and hearsay rule.
*203 “II. The State has failеd to establish a prima facie case and a.corpus delicti.”
The first of the disputed еxhibits is a collation of reports and records certified by the Ohio Registrar of Motor Vehiсles to be true and correct copies of records in his possession relative tо the appellant. Among those papers is a copy of the report of convictions and bond forfeitures of the appellant certified to the Ohio Bureau of Motor Vehicles by the Clerk of Courts of Hamilton Coum ty, reflecting a conviction of the appellant in Hamilton County Municipal Court for aggravated vehicular homicide and, inter alia, the suspension оf appellant’s Ohio driver’s license from February 18, 1976, to February 18, !979.
State’s exhibit two is the registrar’s certification of certain records contained in the Driver’s License Division of the Ohio Bureau of Motor Vehicles reflecting the suspension of the appellant’s driver’s license.
Thе thesis adopted by appellant is that the use of copies of certified recоrds violates “the best evidence rule” and constitutes “double hearsay.”
We do not agree.
The Hamilton’ County Municipal Court and the Clerk of that court had a statutory duty to forward the notice of the suspension of appellant’s license and the license itself to the Registrar of Motor Vehiclеs. 1
It is not questioned that the registrar properly certified the records within his custody.
Consequently, wе hold that where, as here, a notice of the suspension of an Ohio driver’s license of аn offender has been forwarded together with the license itself by a trial court and its clerk tо the registrar, copies of *204 such notice and license properly certified by the registrar as being authentic shall by law be admitted as evidence of the matters stated in such reрorts. 2
In the case sub judice, the accused did not testify. Resultántly, the certifications of the record of the suspension of his driver’s license were sufficient to establish, together with the testimony of the police officer who had responded to the scene of the accident from which the appellant’s citation evolved, the elements of the charge.
Accordingly, we find neither the first nor the second assignment of error to have merit and they are overruled.
• The third assignment is that the judgment is contrary to law because the state failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.
■ Although this court, upon motion, granted leave to supplement the’ rеcord, the transcript of the proceedings discloses only part of what transpired upon trial; consequently, we are unable upon the state of the record to find that the аppellant has established the basis for the assertion in his last assignment. To the contrary, from аll that is before us we can only conclude that the prosecution produced substantial evidence of probative value to prove • every essential element of ■ the offense charged. Therefore, the third assignment is not well taken.
The judgment of the County Court of Clermont County is affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
Shannon, P. J., Palmer and Bettman, JJ., concur.’
Notes
The penultimate paragraph of R. C. 4507.16 provides:
“After an operator’s or chauffeur’s license has been suspended оr revoked, the trial” court shall cause the offender to deliver to’ the court such licеnse, and the court or clerk of such court shall, if such license has been suspended, or rеvoked in connection with any of the herein-before mentioned crimes, forthwith forward to thе registrar such license-together with notice of the action of the court.”
R; C. 2317.42 (Reports оr certified copies to be admitted) provides:
“Official reports made by officers of this state, or certified copies of the same, on a ■matter within the scope of thеir duty, as defined by statute, shall, in so far as relevant, be admitted as evidence of the matters •stated therein.”