State v. D'Andrea

Summary

The Ohio Court of Appeals, Third Appellate District, affirmed Guy Alan D’Andrea’s conviction for second-degree-felony child endangering. The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding the child witness competent, and that any deficiencies in recording the child’s remote testimony did not result in material prejudice. The court also concluded that the conviction was not against the manifest weight of the evidence.

Holdings

1. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by finding N.K. competent to testify because the record supported that she could receive impressions of fact, recall and communicate those impressions, understand truth and falsity, and appreciate the responsibility to testify truthfully. A child over ten is presumed competent, and D'Andrea did not rebut that presumption.
2. The incomplete capture of portions of N.K.'s remote testimony did not require reversal because D'Andrea failed to show the required trial request or objection, failed to establish the importance of the missing portions through the App.R. 9 procedures, and failed to demonstrate material prejudice.
3. D'Andrea's conviction was not against the manifest weight of the evidence because this was not an exceptional case in which the evidence weighed heavily against conviction, and the jury did not clearly lose its way.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by determining that twelve-year-old N.K. was competent to testify.
2. Whether the failure to capture some of N.K.'s remote testimony and other portions of the trial proceedings violated D'Andrea's due-process rights and required reversal.
3. Whether D'Andrea's conviction was against the manifest weight of the evidence.

Disposition

affirmed