Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

State v. Wallace

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eighth District, Cuyahoga

August 24, 2017

STATE OF OHIO PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE
v.
LAWRENCE J. WALLACE DEFENDANT-APPELLANT

         Criminal Appeal from the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Case No. CR-15-601805-A

          ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT Mary Elaine Hall.

          ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE Michael C. O'Malley Cuyahoga County Prosecutor By: Jeffrey Schnatter Melissa Riley Assistant Prosecuting Attorneys.

          BEFORE: Keough, A.J., Boyle, J., and Blackmon, J.

          JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION

          KATHLEEN ANN KEOUGH, ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE.

         {¶1} Defendant-appellant, Lawrence J. Wallace ("Wallace"), appeals from the trial court's judgment, rendered after a jury verdict, finding him guilty of unlawful sexual conduct with a minor, sentencing him to one year incarceration, and determining he is a Tier II sexual offender. Wallace contends that he was denied his constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel when counsel failed to exercise a peremptory challenge and allowed a biased juror to be seated on the jury. Finding no merit to the appeal, we affirm.

         I. Background

         {¶2} Wallace was indicted in a multicount indictment as follows: Count 1, rape (vaginal intercourse) in violation of R.C. 2907.02(A); Count 2, rape by force (cunnilingus) in violation of R.C. 2907.02(A)(2); Count 3, rape by force (digital penetration) in violation of R.C. 2907.02(A)(2); Count 4, gross sexual imposition (touching the victim's breast) in violation of R.C. 2907.05(A)(1); Count 5, gross sexual imposition (touching the victim's thighs) in violation of R.C. 2907.05(A)(1); Count 6, unlawful sexual conduct with a minor in violation of R.C. 2907.04(A), with a furthermore specification that the victim was at least 13 years old but younger than 16, and that Wallace was ten or more years older than the victim at the time of the offense; and Count 7, kidnapping in violation of R.C. 2905.01(A)(4). The charges arose out of incident involving Wallace and his 14-year-old goddaughter.

         {¶3} During voir dire, Juror No. 13 revealed that she was a police officer for the city of Cleveland police department but stated that she believed she could be a juror because "I know how to be impartial and how to, you know, give people fair judgment." She further revealed that two years earlier, she had been the victim of kidnap and rape by her ex-husband, who pleaded guilty to domestic violence as a result of the incident. She stated that her experience would not cause her to be biased against Wallace, however, despite the rape allegations in this case. The prosecutor asked her:

PROSECUTOR: Okay. How do you think that will affect you, hearing from a victim, her saying she's a victim of a rape?
JUROR NO. 13: I don't - I know that it will not affect me to be biased. And the reason I say that is because it wasn't until I was explaining to the police officer and the detective that came out that they put the title "rape" on it.
I just - sometimes when we think of rape, we just think of someone laying down and penetrating themselves into you, but there's so many other, you know, surrounding things of rape.
In my situation, it was him sticking his finger in me, and it wasn't, like, a full-blown. It was - the fact that he touched me there and it penetrated even this much, it was technically rape. So I'm not even - I guess I'm not hurt by it or bothered by it as much as, I guess, people think I should be.
I just don't like to talk about it in front of a lot of people because I don't want them to think that, oh, she's weak, or that happened to her, or, oh, my God. I don't ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.