State v. Redmond

Citation: 2022 Ohio 3734Docket: 111138

Court: Ohio Court of Appeals; October 20, 2022; Ohio; State Appellate Court

Original Court Document: View Document

SummaryOriginalCytator Case TreatmentBackward CitatorAnalysis

EnglishEspañolSimplified EnglishEspañol Fácil

In State v. Redmond, 2022-Ohio-3734, the Eighth Appellate District of Ohio affirmed Jonathan Redmond's convictions for rape and kidnapping following a bench trial. Redmond was charged with multiple counts of rape and one count of kidnapping in a six-count indictment issued on February 12, 2021. After failing to appear for his arraignment, a capias warrant was issued, leading to his arrest. He was released on bond with conditions, including GPS home-detention monitoring, which was later modified to allow him to work.

Redmond waived his right to a jury trial during two pretrial hearings, ultimately proceeding to a bench trial over two days. The state presented testimony from the victim, C.M., who recounted an incident on October 6, 2018, at Redmond's apartment. C.M., who was about to turn seventeen, was visiting her sister D.M. and had limited acquaintance with Redmond, who was 25 years old. After D.M. left the apartment, Redmond engaged C.M. in conversation, during which he attempted to kiss her and offered her money for sexual acts. C.M. resisted his advances, which culminated in Redmond forcibly performing oral sex on her.

Redmond's appeal challenged the sufficiency and weight of the evidence, claimed ineffective assistance of counsel, and argued that the trial court inadequately advised him when waiving his right to a jury trial. The appellate court upheld the trial court's decisions and convictions.

C.M. provided testimony detailing a sexual assault by Redmond, during which she repeatedly asked him to stop. Redmond forcibly pulled down her pajama pants and initiated vaginal intercourse on the couch despite her protests. Throughout the incident, she noted his behavior of looking out the patio window when headlights appeared. The state presented a hand-drawn layout of the apartment, illustrating key locations of the assaults. C.M. depicted two Xs on the couch representing two incidents of rape: the first occurred while she was near the arm of the couch, where Redmond forced her to perform fellatio before vaginally penetrating her, causing her to cry silently.

After the first assault, she went to the bathroom, but Redmond followed, pushing her against the wall of the doorway and resuming intercourse from behind. This lasted five to seven minutes, after which Redmond carried her back to the couch for a repeat of the initial assault, during which he also engaged in inappropriate acts. C.M. testified that she eventually stopped voicing her objections as Redmond ignored her. The entire ordeal lasted approximately five to seven minutes, concluding when she broke down and sobbed.

Post-assault, Redmond requested that she keep the incident confidential. C.M. remained in the apartment, texting her sister, and later explained that she felt frozen and didn’t want to alert her sister to any problems. C.M.’s sister, D.M., appeared ill upon returning home and went to the bathroom to vomit. C.M. left the apartment shortly afterward, with Redmond making comments suggesting everything was fine. Although she did not disclose the incident immediately due to concerns about her sister’s relationships, she eventually shared it with a family friend weeks later and later with her mother. After the incident, C.M. encountered Redmond on three occasions at family events.

C.M. reported an incident of sexual assault to her mother, who encouraged her to file a police report. C.M. initially contacted the Parma police in late 2018 or early 2019, expressing uncertainty about pursuing the case. A female detective informed her that the investigation would remain open. Close family friend S.T. testified that C.M. disclosed the incident around Thanksgiving 2018. C.M.'s mother learned of the incident after questioning C.M. about her declining grades, which were later attributed to the assault rather than marijuana use. On November 27, 2018, C.M.'s mother attempted to file a report but was told C.M. needed to be present. C.M. eventually accompanied her mother to the police station, where she provided a statement. 

Detective Jonathan Fullerton testified that the initial report came through a crime-tip email in November 2018, and the incident was identified as occurring on October 6, 2018, the night of a homecoming dance. C.M. returned in June 2020 to reopen the case, which had been suspended. Detective Fullerton reviewed the details with C.M. and S.T. but was unable to obtain a statement from the accused, Redmond. C.M.'s pediatrician, Dr. Kathryn Corrigan, noted that C.M. described the assault during her appointment on December 5, 2018, detailing unwanted sexual advances by Redmond. C.M. was diagnosed with adjustment disorder, anxiety, and depression, and her test for sexually transmitted diseases returned negative. During the trial, Redmond's defense argued for acquittal, claiming inconsistencies in C.M.'s statements undermined her credibility.

C.M. was not questioned regarding alleged inconsistencies in her testimony, leading the trial court to deny both a motion and a request to consider her recorded statement, which was not in evidence. C.M.'s sister, D.M., testified that C.M. had previously visited the apartment and had used marijuana there. D.M. suspected C.M. was under the influence of marijuana during the incident but did not recall providing it to her due to her own drug testing. During cross-examination, D.M. revealed she had taken LSD that evening, which caused her to vomit. She noted C.M. left shortly after her return but came back the next morning while Redmond was present. D.M. recorded videos of C.M. and Redmond at a family gathering after the incident, with three still images from these videos entered as evidence. On November 16, 2021, the trial court found Redmond guilty of multiple counts, including rape and kidnapping, sentencing him to four years in prison as a Tier III sex offender, with conditions for postrelease control. Redmond appealed, asserting insufficient evidence supported his convictions, particularly regarding the use of force required for rape and kidnapping under relevant statutes. The definitions of "force" and the conditions necessary for such convictions were outlined, emphasizing the need for the prosecution to prove elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt while considering the context of the parties involved.

C.M. provided detailed testimony regarding multiple counts of sexual assault by Redmond. For Count 1 (fellatio), she stated that Redmond forcefully held her head and penetrated her mouth despite her repeated objections of “no” and “stop.” In Count 2 (vaginal penetration), after the oral act, Redmond forcibly removed her pants and engaged in vaginal intercourse while she cried and asked him to stop multiple times. Count 4 involved a second instance of vaginal penetration where Redmond pushed her against a wall and resumed intercourse, preventing her from escaping. In Counts 3 (kidnapping), 5 (vaginal penetration), and 6 (cunnilingus), Redmond further carried her back to the couch, continuing to assault her and performing oral sex until she sobbed loudly. Redmond claimed the acts were consensual, but the record indicates C.M. was 16 years old and expressed fear due to Redmond's age and physical size. C.M. consistently stated she did not consent and articulated her objections multiple times. Redmond's argument that C.M. didn’t physically resist was countered by Ohio law, which does not require physical resistance for a conviction of rape. The evidence, viewed favorably for the prosecution, supports a conclusion that Redmond used force to compel C.M. into the acts, validating the convictions for rape and kidnapping.

In his second assignment of error, Redmond contended that the convictions were against the manifest weight of the evidence due to alleged inconsistencies in C.M.'s testimony. However, a manifest weight challenge assesses the persuasiveness of evidence rather than the sufficiency. A reversal on this basis is rare and requires a clear indication that the trial court's judgment was a manifest miscarriage of justice. The review process involves a thorough examination of the entire record, weighing the evidence, and considering witness credibility. The court concluded that there was sufficient credible evidence to uphold the convictions.

Redmond contends that C.M.'s testimony lacks details regarding their interactions after the alleged incident. C.M. mentioned seeing Redmond three times post-October 6, 2018, including a pumpkin-carving party, Halloween, and a school play. Redmond asserts that their interactions were friendly, supported by exhibits A, B, and C, which are still images from videos taken on October 17, 2018. Exhibit A shows C.M. and Redmond play fighting with light sabers, while exhibits B and C feature C.M. in suggestive poses with a light saber, which Redmond argues undermines her rape claims. However, the court noted that these exhibits do not directly address whether C.M. consented to sex on October 6, and rejects Redmond's interpretation of exhibits B and C due to their lack of date stamps and Redmond's absence.

Redmond also argues inconsistencies in C.M.'s testimony regarding the duration of the alleged rape. He highlights a discrepancy between C.M.'s claim of the rape lasting "five to seven minutes" and her assertion that "the whole thing was like five to seven minutes." The court clarifies that C.M.'s statements are not contradictory, as the total duration could encompass multiple incidents. Redmond further points to inconsistencies regarding C.M.'s verbal objections during the incident. C.M. testified that she was attempting to express her disapproval while simultaneously feeling overwhelmed, which the court finds coherent rather than contradictory.

Additionally, Redmond claims C.M.'s testimony omits mentions of his attempts to record sexual acts. While C.M. had previously referenced this in a statement, it was not addressed during her testimony. Dr. Corrigan's notes do not confirm penetration, but she explained that the examination focused on STD testing and that physical evidence of rape might not be present after time has elapsed. The court finds Redmond's arguments regarding inconsistencies unpersuasive.

Redmond contends that C.M.’s actions post-incident—staying in the apartment, returning the next day, and delaying her report—undermine her credibility regarding her rape allegations. C.M. explained that she stayed because she felt paralyzed and wanted to avoid raising suspicion, and she delayed reporting to protect her familial relationships. The court found no significant inconsistencies in her testimony, ruling that the evidence did not heavily favor Redmond, and therefore overruled his second assignment of error.

In his third assignment of error, Redmond claims ineffective assistance of counsel due to inadequate arguments during his Crim. R. 29 motion and failure to present impeachment evidence. To prove ineffective assistance, a defendant must show both deficient performance and resulting prejudice. The presumption is that counsel performed competently, and strategic choices are afforded deference. The court noted that Redmond's counsel effectively contested C.M.’s credibility instead of focusing solely on sufficiency arguments, which was deemed a valid trial tactic. Furthermore, Redmond argued that counsel should have impeached C.M. regarding a statement about recording sexual acts for the internet. However, the court noted that the substance of this statement was already presented in other evidence and doubted that its introduction would have altered the trial's outcome. Thus, the court concluded that Redmond did not demonstrate ineffective assistance of counsel.

Redmond's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, based on evidence outside the trial record, specifically C.M.'s alleged statement to police, is not admissible in this court and should be pursued through a postconviction relief petition rather than a direct appeal. Consequently, his third assignment of error is overruled. Regarding the fourth assignment of error, Redmond argues the trial court did not ensure he understood the rights he waived by relinquishing his right to a jury trial, as required by R.C. 2945.05. This statute mandates that a jury waiver be in writing, signed, filed, and made in open court after the defendant consults with counsel. The record shows that during two jury-waiver hearings, on June 30, 2021, and November 15, 2021, the trial court confirmed Redmond's understanding of his rights and that he had consulted with his counsel. A written jury waiver was executed in court and filed appropriately. Therefore, the court finds Redmond's waiver was voluntary, knowing, and intelligent, leading to the overruling of his fourth assignment of error. The judgment is affirmed, with costs taxed to the appellant, reasonable grounds found for the appeal, and a mandate issued for the common pleas court to execute the judgment. Redmond's bail pending appeal is terminated, and the case is remanded for the execution of his sentence. A certified copy of this entry serves as the mandate per Rule 21 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure.