Summary
The Ninth District Court of Appeals of Ohio affirmed Lester Bullard’s conviction for domestic violence under Ohio Revised Code 2919.25(A). The court rejected challenges based on sufficiency and manifest weight of the evidence, ineffective assistance of counsel, the trial court’s calling of the victim as its witness, and denial of a motion for a new trial.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the domestic-violence conviction was supported by legally sufficient evidence.
- Whether the conviction was against the manifest weight of the evidence.
- Whether trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to alleged hearsay, failing to demand a jury, failing to object to in-court identifications, and failing to object to testimony about bruising.
- Whether the trial court erred by calling S.R. as the court's witness under Evid.R. 614(A).
- Whether the trial court erred by denying Bullard's motion for a new trial based on ineffective assistance of counsel.
Holdings
- The evidence was legally sufficient because eyewitness testimony, viewed in the light most favorable to the State, permitted a rational trier of fact to find that Bullard knowingly caused physical harm to a household member.
- The conviction was not against the manifest weight of the evidence because the conflicts in eyewitness testimony did not make this the exceptional case in which the trier of fact clearly lost its way.
- Bullard failed to establish ineffective assistance because he did not demonstrate deficient performance and resulting prejudice, and in each asserted instance he failed at least to show a reasonable probability that the trial outcome would have differed.
- Bullard forfeited appellate review of the challenge because he did not object when the State requested that the trial court call S.R. as the court's witness and did not develop a plain-error argument.
- The denial of Bullard's motion for a new trial was affirmed because the sole basis for that assignment was ineffective assistance of counsel, which the court had already rejected.
Key quotations
“it is not appropriate to combine a sufficiency argument and a manifest weight argument within a single assignment of error.” (¶ 8)
“The relevant inquiry is whether, after viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime proven beyond a reasonable doubt.” (¶ 10)
“To prove ineffective assistance of counsel, Mr. Bullard must establish both that: (1) his counsel’s performance was deficient, and (2) the deficient performance prejudiced the defense.” (¶ 17)
“A defendant forfeits appellate review of an alleged error at trial if [he] fails to contemporaneously object to that error at trial.” (¶ 29)
Factual background
Police responded to reports that Bullard and his girlfriend, S.R., had been fighting in the street on two occasions on April 16, 2020. Eyewitness S.C. testified that Bullard kicked S.R. hard enough to make her scream and fall, and also shoved her; another eyewitness described Bullard attempting to kick S.R. as she tried to leave. Although Bullard and S.R. denied physical contact, the municipal court credited the eyewitnesses, convicted Bullard of domestic violence, and imposed jail time and a fine.
Procedural history
The Wayne County Municipal Court convicted Bullard after a bench trial and sentenced him to jail and a fine. The court appointed new counsel, held a hearing concerning Bullard's motion for a new trial, and denied the motion. Bullard appealed, and the Ninth District Court of Appeals overruled all four assignments of error and affirmed.
Remand instructions
The court ordered a special mandate directing the Wayne County Municipal Court to execute the judgment; no substantive remand was ordered.