State v. Donaldson

Summary

The Ohio Sixth District Court of Appeals affirmed Christopher Donaldson’s conviction for third-degree felony child endangering under R.C. 2919.22(A). The court held that Donaldson waived his untimely indictment challenge and failed to demonstrate prejudice from the late disclosure of a supplemental expert report, and it concluded that the conviction was supported by sufficient evidence and was not against the manifest weight of the evidence.

Holdings

1. The trial court properly denied Donaldson's motion to dismiss as untimely because he did not timely challenge the indictment, did not seek leave to file the untimely motion, and failed to identify a substantive defect in the indictment; the claim was waived under Crim.R. 12(H).
2. The trial court did not commit reversible error by permitting the expert to testify regarding the supplemental report because Donaldson rejected a continuance offered to cure the Crim.R. 16(K) violation and failed to establish prejudice.
3. The evidence was sufficient to support Donaldson's conviction because a rational trier of fact could find beyond a reasonable doubt that he recklessly created a substantial risk to his infant son's health or safety by violating a duty of care, causing serious physical harm.
4. The conviction was not against the manifest weight of the evidence because the greater amount of credible evidence supported the jury's determination that Donaldson's forceful handling caused the infant's serious injury.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court erred by denying as untimely Donaldson's Crim.R. 12 motion to dismiss based on alleged defects in the indictment.
2. Whether the trial court erred by permitting the State's expert to testify regarding a supplemental report disclosed approximately four days before trial in violation of Crim.R. 16(K).
3. Whether the conviction for endangering children was supported by sufficient evidence.
4. Whether the conviction was against the manifest weight of the evidence.

Disposition

affirmed