Ohio Criminal Appeals Lawyer Blog

In Ohio Courts of Appeal there will be three judges deciding your appeal. What if two of the appellate judges get it wrong? You lose! The majority opinion is what decides your fate. Even if the dissenting judge makes a well reasoned opinion based on the facts and law. You still lose. And do you think the Ohio Supreme Court is going to fix it? Think again. The OSC is not into "error correction."

That appears to be what happened to Thomas Ricks who was on trial for aggravated murder and other crimes. Ricks, aka "Peanut," was a "shooting suspect" along with his co-defendant Gipson. Gispson did not testify at Ricks' jury trial, but the prosecutor had a cop testify that Gipson identified Ricks as "Peanut." Hearsay right? Oh no, the prosecutor argued, it is just to show why the cop did what he did. Yeah, right. And the trial judge allowed it over objection. The judge told the jury they did not hear that Gipson identified Ricks as "Peanut" for the truth of the matter asserted. The judge said, just because you heard that Gipson identified Ricks as Peanut does not "necessarily mean that that was Peanut ... but they are really brought in for the purpose to explain this officer or that department's investigation, why they were doing what they were doing."

The dissenting judge wrote a well-reasoned opinion in which he showed how the other two appellate judges got it wrong in three different ways. They used the wrong standard of review, they erred by affirming the actions of the trial judge, and the prosecutor committed prosecutorial misconduct by getting this damaging hearsay before the jury and then argued it as substantive evidence of guilt. Read the reasoning by the majority in paragraphs 59 to 69 and then the dissenting opinion from paragraphs 103 to 135 here.

If you are accused of a crime or have been convicted already, contact me if you can afford to hire a private criminal defense lawyer. Otherwise, contact your county or state public defender to see if they can help.

Contact me 24/7 by sending an email to ohiocriminalappealslawyer@gmail.com

Rape convictions were reversed in Wood County in part because hearsay was allowed in a jury trial over objections. The prosecution claimed while the testimony was coming in that the information was not being offered for the truth of the matter asserted (and therefore was not hearsay), but then the prosecutor later argued in closing argument that the hearsay should be considered for its truth. The Sixth District Court of Appeals for Wood County stated that "the well-worn phrase, 'not offered for the truth of the matter asserted' is not a talismanic incantation that opens the door to everything said outside the courtroom." The Court of Appeals also noted that if an out of court statement is received for a purpose other than the truth of the matter asserted, then the content "is not substantive evidence." Read the opinion here.

If you are accused of a crime or have been convicted already, contact me if you can afford to hire a private criminal defense lawyer. Otherwise, contact your county or state public defender to see if they can help.

Contact me 24/7 by sending an email to ohiocriminalappealslawyer@gmail.com