 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Adams6/30/2004
ving committed rape, a felony of the first degree, pursuant to R.C. 2903.02(B). According to the foregoing facts, appellant beat and strangled Roslyn, leaving her in either an unconscious or comatose state. Dr. Germaniuk testified that he found petechiae, which in this type of situation, may be indicative of some type of asphyxia, choking, or strangulation. Based on Gibson and Losey, supra, an ordinarily prudent person could anticipate that death is a foreseeable consequence when a victim's neck is compressed to the point that his or her hyoid bone becomes fractured, which renders the victim incapacitated. Death is also a foreseeable consequence and could be reasonably anticipated by leaving a victim alone in an unconscious or comatose state without any medical attention.
. Appellant stresses that the immediate cause of Roslyn's death was carbon monoxide intoxication. Appellant argues that even if he did rape, beat, and leave Roslyn alone in the vehicle, he could not have foreseen that the vehicle would unexplainably burst into flames. According to appellant, the car fire was both an intervening force and entirely unforeseeable. We disagree.
. Balut testified that although the cause of the fire was undetermined, it did not appear to be accidental. Also, Dr. Germaniuk repeatedly stated that Roslyn died of carbon monoxide intoxication because her injuries incapacitated her to the point where she could not extricate herself from the burning vehicle. Therefore, if Roslyn had not been raped, strangled, or beaten into a stupor in the first place, she most likely would have been able to get out of the burning vehicle alive.
. The immediate cause of death, carbon monoxide intoxication, was a proximate result of the rape victim being left alone, incapacitated, and without medical attention. As such, an ordinarily prudent person could anticipate that death was a foreseeable consequence. See Gibson and Losey, supra. Therefore, the trial court's determination of guilt, pursuant to R.C. 2903.02(B), was proper. Thus, appellant's third assignment of error is without merit.
. In his fourth assignment of error, appellant argues that his conviction for rape is against the manifest weight of the evidence.
. In Schlee, supra, at 14-15, the court stated that "`manifest weight' requires a review of the weight of the evidence presented, not whether the state has offered sufficient evidence on each element of the offense.
. "`In determining whether the verdict was against the manifest weight of the evidence, "( *) the court reviewing the entire record, weighs the evidence and all reasonable inferences, considers the credibility of witnesses and determines whether in resolving conflicts in the evidence, the jury clearly lost its way and created such a manifest miscarriage of justice that the conviction must be reversed and a new trial ordered. ( *)"' (Citations omitted.) *" (Emphasis sic.)
. A judgment of a trial court should be reversed as being against the manifest weight of the evidence "only in the exceptional case in which the evidence weighs heavily against the conviction." State v. Thompkins (1997), 78 Ohio St.3d 380, 387.
. In the case sub judice, appellant's sperm was found in Roslyn's anal cavity. Even appellant's counsel conceded at trial that appellant did, in fact, engage in sexual intercourse with Roslyn on the night in question. Thus, it was logical for the jury to conclude that Roslyn was beaten and strangled to facilitate sexual activity because when her body was discovered, her shorts were pulled down to her knees and her top was up to her breasts. As such, it was reasonable for the jury to infer that the indiv
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Ohio DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|