Youngstown Daily Legal News

Felony domestic violence conviction upheld by court

JESSICA SHAMBAUGH
Special to the Legal News
Published: June 27, 2014

A three-judge appellate panel for the 5th District Court of Appeals recently affirmed a man’s convictions for felony domestic violence and abduction after ruling that victim and police testimony constituted competent, credible evidence.

The Richland County Court of Common Pleas tried Dennis Caldwell on counts of felony domestic violence and abduction following an altercation with his wife in July 2013.

On the date in question, the Mansfield Police Department received two phone calls about an altercation on Hedges Street.

One caller reported a woman screaming for help and the second described a man beating a woman while she screamed out of the window for help.

Two police officers responded to the scene and noted that they could hear a woman screaming from the second floor as they approached the house.

Officer Jason Bamman told the court he heard her shouting “let me go” and “please get off me.”

The officers entered the home after finding that the front door was unlocked.

They then climbed the stairs toward the sound of the argument and found Caldwell standing in a bedroom with his back to the door.

On the other side of the bed, the officers could see his wife, R.C., in a defensive posture with her hands up, as if to protect herself.

They recalled that R.C. could not have left the room without coming into contact with Caldwell and that she did not appear free to leave.

They said that was when they ordered Caldwell to the ground and he complied.

They noted a strong odor of alcohol and slurred speech as they placed him in handcuffs.

R.C. was hysterical and fearful of Caldwell. The officers said she had a large bruise on her forehead, redness on her lip and redness and scratching on her cheek.

They did not see any indication that she had consumed drugs or alcohol.

R.C. also testified at Caldwell’s trial. She said she was married to Caldwell and the couple had a 5-year-old son, although child services removed all of her children from her home after a domestic violence incident with Caldwell.

She told the court she was not living with Caldwell at the time of the incident but would stay with him from time to time.

On the date in question, she said she made him dinner, showered and changed into shorts and a tank top.

When Caldwell saw her outfit, she said he accused her of showing off for his cousin, who was also present.

The argument turned physical when Caldwell struck her with a shoe and punched her with his fists.

She said he held his hand over her face to keep her from screaming and would not allow her to leave.

In contrast, Caldwell testified that R.C. did not cook for him that night but instead the couple sat in the backyard and drank with his cousin and another woman.

He said he only drank a single beer because he is diabetic.

Caldwell also denied fighting with R.C. about her apparel and said the disagreement started after he refused to give her money to buy Vicodin.

He said he was worried about her drug use because it had led to child services taking away her children.

According to Caldwell, he did not strike R.C. and she injured herself while attacking him. He also reported that her screams of “let me go” were suicidal in context.

On rebuttal, the state called the couple’s caseworker from child services who testified that the children were removed because of a domestic violence incident with Caldwell and because R.C. was caught taking medication prescribed to her children.

The jury found Caldwell guilty of both charges and the common pleas court sentenced him to three years in prison for each count, with the terms running concurrently.

On direct appeal to the 5th District, Caldwell argued that his conviction was against the manifest weight of the evidence.

The appellate judges determined that the state presented evidence supporting all elements of both the abduction and domestic violence charges.

Specifically, they found that testimony from Bamman and R.C. showed that the victim was not free to leave, she was married to Caldwell, and she sustained injuries to her head and face during a physical fight with him.

“While appellant testified that he did not strike R.C. and that she was the one who was the aggressor by striking him with a shoe, and that she hit her head on the nightstand when she attempted to throw him off the bed, the jury did not lose its way in believing R.C.’s testimony over appellant’s,” Judge Craig Baldwin wrote for the court.

The judges found the convictions were not against the manifest weight of the evidence and rejected Caldwell’s first assignment of error.

He next contended the trial court erred by allowing the case worker to testify about his past issues with domestic violence.

Upon review, the appellate judges found that Caldwell’s trial counsel objected to the testimony and the trial court found it was permissible because it was offered as a rebuttal to Caldwell’s testimony that the children were removed based on his wife’s drug use.

The 5th District judges determined that even if the evidence was not admissible, its admission was harmless.

“The jury heard evidence that appellant had two past convictions of domestic violence, as these convictions were a part of the charge which elevated the crime of domestic violence to a felony. Further appellant was given wide latitude on cross-examination ...to inquire into R.C.’s drug use,” Judge Baldwin stated.

The judges found that the testimony both contradicted and corroborated Caldwell’s testimony about the children’s removal and ruled that any potential error was harmless.

“The judgment of the Richland County Common Pleas Court is affirmed. Costs are assessed to appellant.”

Presiding Judge William Hoffman and Judge Sheila Farmer concurred.

The case is cited State v. Caldwell, 2014-Ohio-2416.

[Back]