State v. Minera

Summary

The Twelfth District Court of Appeals of Ohio affirmed Benjamin Minera’s conviction for third-degree-misdemeanor sexual imposition. The court held that the corroboration requirement in Ohio Revised Code § 2907.06(B) is a threshold evidentiary requirement for the trial court, not an element of the offense, and rejected Minera’s related indictment, due process, plain-error, and cumulative-error arguments.

Holdings

1. Corroboration is not an element of sexual imposition under R.C. 2907.06. It is an ancillary evidentiary requirement and a threshold legal-sufficiency inquiry for the trial judge, not a factual element that must be proved to the factfinder beyond a reasonable doubt.
2. The indictment was not defective for failing to allege corroboration, it stated an offense, and the trial court did not err by convicting Minera without finding corroboration as an element proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
3. Minera failed to establish cumulative error or ineffective assistance of counsel because his underlying assignments of error lacked merit and he could not demonstrate resulting prejudice.

Questions Presented

1. Whether corroboration under R.C. 2907.06(B) is an element of sexual imposition that must be alleged in the indictment and proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
2. Whether the indictment failed to state an offense or provide constitutionally adequate notice because it did not allege corroboration.
3. Whether the trial court committed plain error by convicting Minera without finding corroboration as an element of the offense.
4. Whether cumulative error and ineffective assistance of counsel required reversal of the conviction.

Disposition

affirmed