DocketNumber: Case No. 84114.
Citation Numbers: 2004 Ohio 6627
Judges: MICHAEL J. CORRIGAN, ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE.
Filed Date: 12/9/2004
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 4/18/2021
{¶ 16} I agree with the majority opinion except for its statement that "the weight of the evidence and the credibility of the witnesses is left to the trier of fact * * *."1
{¶ 17} This statement is derived from an earlier case: Statev. DeHass, (1967)10 Ohio St.2d 230. I must first note that the Ohio Supreme Court originally qualified the sentence with the word "primarily." Thus in DeHass the sentence read as follows: "In either a criminal or civil case the weight to be given the evidence and the credibility of the witnesses are primarily for the trier of the facts." Id. at 231 (emphasis added).
{¶ 18} I also note that in State v. Lynch
(2003), 98 Ohio St. 3d 514 at ¶ 89, and again in the 2004 case of State v.Bryan,
{¶ 19} I further note that DeHass was a 1967 case and the appeal was on a "question of law." In the later case of State v.Thompkins (1997),
{¶ 20} The authority of Ohio appellate courts to weigh evidence is derived from the Ohio Constitution, Art
{¶ 21} In State v. Mattison (1985),
1. that a reviewing court is not required to accept as true the incredible;
2. whether evidence is uncontradicted;
3. whether a witness was impeached;
4. what was not proved;
5. the certainty of the evidence;
6. the reliability of the evidence;
7. whether a witness' testimony is self-serving;
8. whether the evidence is vague, uncertain, conflicting, or fragmentary.
{¶ 22} This list demonstrates the considerable extent to which matters are not "left" to the trial court under the manifest weight standard. The earlier statement from DeHass, however, much like a bad penny, keeps turning up in the context of a manifest weight test. I write only to clarify an important qualification ("primarily") and to emphasize DeHass should be limited to a review of sufficiency of the evidence.