State v. Clemens

2025 Ohio 383
CourtOhio Court of Appeals
DecidedFebruary 4, 2025
Docket23 AP 0007
StatusPublished

This text of 2025 Ohio 383 (State v. Clemens) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State v. Clemens, 2025 Ohio 383 (Ohio Ct. App. 2025).

Opinion

[Cite as State v. Clemens, 2025-Ohio-383.]

COURT OF APPEALS MORGAN COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

STATE OF OHIO : JUDGES: : Hon. William B. Hoffman, P.J. Plaintiff-Appellee : Hon. Craig R. Baldwin, J. : Hon. Andrew J. King, J. -vs- : : CALEB CLEMENS : Case No. 23 AP 0007 : Defendant-Appellant : OPINION

CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: Appeal from the Court of Common Pleas, Case No. 21-CR-0034

JUDGMENT: Affirmed

DATE OF JUDGMENT: February 4, 2025

APPEARANCES:

For Plaintiff-Appellee For Defendant-Appellant

JANNA C. WOODBURN CHRIS BRIGDON 19 East Main Street 8138 Somerset Road McConnelsville, OH 43756 Thornville, OH 43076 Morgan County, Case No. 23 AP 0007 2

King, J.

{¶ 1} Defendant-Appellant Caleb Clemens appeals the May 3, 2023 judgment of

conviction and sentence of the Morgan County Court of Common Pleas. Plaintiff-Appellee

is the State of Ohio. We affirm the trial court.

FACTS AND PROCUDURAL HISTORY

{¶ 2} Caleb Clemens and Rusty Campbell, each 30-years old at the time of the

events herein, have been friends since kindergarten. In May of 2021, Campbell arranged

for his 15-year-old niece (herein Jane Doe) to engage in sexual conduct with Clemens as

a birthday gift.

{¶ 3} On May 18, 2021, Campbell sent a video to Clemens showing Doe nude

and engaging in sexual conduct with himself in order to entice him to do the same. Later

that day Campbell dropped Doe off at Clemens' mother's home where Clemens was

staying at the time. Clemens gave Doe methamphetamine to smoke and engaged in oral

and vaginal intercourse with Doe. He then called Campbell to come and pick up Doe.

{¶ 4} Doe was unsure whether Campbell had advised Clemens of her age. This

incident was not the only time Campbell had forced Doe to engage in sexual conduct with

adult men. Campbell would receive drugs, money, or other things he needed from the

men Doe had sex with. If she did not want to cooperate, Campbell would threaten to hurt

one of Doe's siblings or one of her animals. Doe eventually told a family friend what was

occurring and an investigation ensued.

{¶ 5} On October 18, 2021, the Morgan County Grand Jury returned an

indictment charging Clemens with one count of unlawful sexual conduct with a minor, a Morgan County, Case No. 23 AP 0007 3

felony of the third degree and one count of corrupting another with drugs, a felony of the

second degree.

{¶ 6} In August of 2022, Clemens originally pled guilty to unlawful sexual conduct

with a minor as charged and an amended count of attempted corrupting another with

drugs, a felony of the third degree. Before sentencing, however, Clemens filed a motion

to withdraw his guilty pleas which the trial court granted in November of 2022.

{¶ 7} The amendment to count two, corrupting another with drugs was rescinded

by the state. Clemens elected to proceed to a jury trial which took place on April 21, 2023.

The state presented evidence from Doe, Detectives Kelly McGilton and Zackary Kehl of

the Southeastern Ohio Human Trafficking Task Force, and Matthew Anderson, a

Washington County Sheriff's Department forensic analyst as well as a task force member.

Clemens presented testimony from his mother and Rusty Campbell. After hearing the

evidence and deliberating, the jury acquitted Clemens of corrupting another with drugs,

but convicted him of unlawful sexual conduct with a minor. He was subsequently

sentenced to 60 months incarceration.

{¶ 8} Clemens was appointed appellate counsel, but no appeal was filed. We

therefore dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution. New counsel was appointed by

the trial court and counsel filed a motion to reopen. We granted the same. Counsel timely

filed the instant appeal raising the following assignments of error:

I

{¶ 9} "INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE AS IT RELATES TO COUNT 28 FELONIOUS

ASSAULT IN VIOLATION OF O.R.C. 2903.11(A)(1), 2903.11(D)(1)(A)."

II Morgan County, Case No. 23 AP 0007 4

{¶ 10} "AGAINST THE MANIFEST WEIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE."

III

{¶ 11} "INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE AS IT RELATES TO THE FAILURE TO FILE

A MOTION FOR AQUITTAL RELATED TO COUNT 28 WITHIN 14 DAYS OF THE FINAL

VERDICT."

I, II

{¶ 12} As an initial matter, we note Clemens' three assignment of error captions

and issues presented appear to have nothing to do with this case, as they mention

felonious assault and failure to file a motion. We therefore address the two issues raised

in the body of the brief which are challenges to manifest weight and sufficiency as they

pertain to unlawful sexual conduct with a minor. Specifically, Clemens argues the State

failed to prove he acted recklessly in regard to Doe's age and the jury lost its way in finding

he did. We disagree.

Standard of Review

{¶ 13} On review for sufficiency, a reviewing court is to examine the evidence at

trial to determine whether such evidence, if believed, would support a conviction. State v.

Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (1991). "The relevant inquiry is whether, after viewing the

evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have

found the essential elements of the crime proven beyond a reasonable doubt." Jenks at

paragraph two of the syllabus, following Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979). On

review for manifest weight, a reviewing court is to examine the entire record, weigh the

evidence and all reasonable inferences, consider the credibility of witnesses and

determine "whether in resolving conflicts in the evidence, the jury clearly lost its way and Morgan County, Case No. 23 AP 0007 5

created such a manifest miscarriage of justice that the conviction must be reversed and

a new trial ordered." State v. Martin, 20 Ohio App.3d 172, 175 (1st Dist.1983). See also,

State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (1997). The granting of a new trial "should be

exercised only in the exceptional case in which the evidence weighs heavily against the

conviction." Martin at 175.

Clemens' Argument

{¶ 14} Clemens was convicted of unlawful sexual conduct with a minor pursuant

to R.C. 2907.04 which provides no person eighteen years of age or older shall engage in

sexual conduct with another who not the spouse of the offender when the offender knows

the other person is thirteen years of age or older, but less than sixteen, or is reckless in

that regard. R.C. 2901.22(C) defines reckless as:

A person acts recklessly when, with heedless indifference to the

consequences, the person disregards a substantial and unjustifiable

risk that the person's conduct is likely to cause a certain result or is

likely to be of a certain nature. A person is reckless with respect to

circumstances when, with heedless indifference to the

consequences, the person disregards a substantial and unjustifiable

risk that such circumstances are likely to exist.

{¶ 15} Direct evidence of Clemens' knowledge was not required because

circumstantial and direct evidence inherently possess the same probative value. State v.

Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (1991). Circumstantial evidence is that which can be "inferred Morgan County, Case No. 23 AP 0007 6

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Jackson v. Virginia
443 U.S. 307 (Supreme Court, 1979)
State v. Martin
485 N.E.2d 717 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1983)
State v. Fairbanks
289 N.E.2d 352 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1972)
State v. Jenks
574 N.E.2d 492 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1991)
State v. Thompkins
678 N.E.2d 541 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1997)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2025 Ohio 383, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-clemens-ohioctapp-2025.