 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Adams6/30/2004
h DNA testing, was placed there through the insertion of [the defendant's] penis into the victim's anus. The evidence did not support an acquittal on the charge of rape." Id. at 601.
. In the instant matter, appellant was the last person seen with Roslyn on the night in question. Rosyln's body was found with physical injuries. Dr. Germaniuk opined that all of Roslyn's injuries occurred in less than a half-hour, perhaps only minutes before her death. When Roslyn's body was discovered, her shorts were pulled down to her knees and her tank top was up below her breasts. Sperm was found in Roslyn's anal cavity which matched appellant's DNA by a statistical probability of one in over four and one-half billion. Therefore, based on these facts, as well as Harris and Carter, supra, there was sufficient evidence to prove the element of sexual conduct.
. Appellant next argues that appellee failed to prove the element of force or threat of force, pursuant to R.C. 2907.02(A)(2). Again, however, due to the condition of Roslyn's clothing, as well as the bodily injuries she sustained, the trier of fact could reasonably conclude that appellant used force to facilitate anal sex with her. Although Dr. Germaniuk found no evidence of trauma to the anal or vaginal areas of Roslyn's body, he testified that the combined effects of alcohol, Valium, trauma to the head, and strangulation, would cause the tone of the sphincter muscle to decrease, which may have contributed to the lack of physical damage to Roslyn's anus. Dr. Germaniuk further stated that the absence of trauma to the genitalia does not preclude that force was involved in the sexual act. The foregoing facts show that Roslyn could not have sustained such severe injuries during her brief confrontation with David. Justice even testified that when she saw Roslyn leave David's house for the last time, she noticed no visible injuries on her. Thus, according to Dr. Germaniuk's and Justice's testimony, as well as Roslyn's bodily injuries and state of undress, there was sufficient evidence to prove that force was used when the sexual conduct occurred pursuant to R.C. 2907.02(A)(2).
. Appellant's second question presented for review and argument deals with whether his conviction for murder, pursuant to R.C. 2903.02(B), is supported by sufficient evidence. Appellant stresses that the record reveals that an expert testified that the immediate cause of the death of the alleged victim was acute carbon monoxide inhalation, the underlying felony of violence supporting the murder charge is rape, and there is no evidence that appellant started or had reason to know of the fire which produced the carbon monoxide that cause the alleged victim's death.
. R.C. 2903.02(B) states in pertinent part that " o person shall cause the death of another as a proximate result of the offender's committing or attempting to commit an offense of violence that is a felony of the first or second degree *."
. "` * roximate result' bears a resemblance to the concept of `proximate cause' in that (a) defendant will be held responsible for those foreseeable consequences which are known to be, or should be known to be, within the scope of the risk created by his conduct. ( *) Here, that means that death reasonably could be anticipated by an ordinarily prudent person as likely to result under these or similar circumstances. ( *).' (Citations omitted.)" State v. Gibson (June 27, 1997), 11th Dist. No. 95-P-0125, 1997 Ohio App. LEXIS 2898, at 12-13, quoting State v. Losey (1985), 23 Ohio App.3d 93, 95.
. In the case at bar, the trial court had sufficient evidence to determine that appellant caused the death of Roslyn as the proximate result of ha
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.
|
|