Quantcast

Ohio Supreme Court upholds conviction despite unconstitutional video testimony

LEGAL NEWSLINE

Sunday, November 24, 2024

Ohio Supreme Court upholds conviction despite unconstitutional video testimony

State Supreme Court
Webp 3a9m5c6ddxv5elrp3u0b3wi3fndn

Justice Jennifer Brunner | Ohio Supreme Court Website

The Supreme Court of Ohio has upheld the sexual battery conviction of Eli Carter, despite ruling that his constitutional right to confront witnesses was violated when a witness testified via videoconference. The court found that this testimony did not affect the trial's outcome.

Justice R. Patrick DeWine wrote for the majority, noting that while video testimony is sometimes permitted by the U.S. Supreme Court, the trial court in Carter's case did not provide specific reasons for allowing remote testimony. However, this error was considered "harmless" due to overwhelming evidence against Carter.

Chief Justice Sharon L. Kennedy and Justices Patrick F. Fischer, Michael P. Donnelly, and Joseph T. Deters supported Justice DeWine’s opinion. Justices Melody Stewart and Jennifer Brunner agreed with the judgment but not necessarily with all reasoning.

Justice Fischer also issued a concurring opinion emphasizing differences between federal and state confrontation clauses and suggesting future challenges to existing precedents.

N.C., who was adopted by Carter after spending years in foster care, reported that he sexually abused her starting from her teenage years until she stopped visiting home during college. Despite initially reporting the abuse in 2010, it wasn't fully investigated until 2017 when Detective Dwight Salyer reopened the case.

In February 2022, just before Carter’s trial began, the prosecution requested permission for Michael Mullins to testify remotely due to concerns about COVID-19 and travel issues. Although Carter objected, citing his right to face-to-face confrontation, Mullins testified remotely about past admissions made by Carter regarding N.C.'s allegations.

Carter was ultimately convicted on two counts of sexual battery but acquitted of rape charges. He appealed based on the alleged violation of his rights due to Mullins' video testimony but both appellate courts affirmed his conviction.

The Supreme Court analyzed whether Carter's rights were infringed under both federal and Ohio constitutional provisions but determined no reversible error occurred as other evidence sufficiently established guilt beyond a reasonable doubt without reliance on Mullins’ testimony.

The full text of this decision is available online under case number 2023-0156: State v. Carter, Slip Opinion No. 2024-Ohio-1247.

ORGANIZATIONS IN THIS STORY

More News