State v. Kendrick
This text of 2011 Ohio 4433 (State v. Kendrick) 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.
Opinion
[Cite as State v. Kendrick, 2011-Ohio-4433.]
COURT OF APPEALS DELAWARE COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
STATE OF OHIO : JUDGES: : : Hon. Patricia A. Delaney, P.J. Plaintiff-Appellee : Hon. Sheila G. Farmer, J. : Hon. John W. Wise, J. -vs- : : Case No. 10-CA-23 JAMES J. KENDRICK : : : Defendant-Appellant : OPINION
CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: Appeal from the Delaware County Municipal Court Case No. 09TRC14473
JUDGMENT: AFFIRMED
DATE OF JUDGMENT ENTRY: August 26, 2011
APPEARANCES:
For Plaintiff-Appellee: For Defendant-Appellant:
JOSEPH E. SCHMANSKY 0071860 JAMES J. KENDRICK, Pro Se 70 N. Union St. 1488 Silversmith Dr. Delaware, Ohio 43015 Delaware, Ohio 43015
Delaney, J.
{¶1} Defendant-Appellant James Kendrick appeals from the judgment of the
Delaware Municipal Court, finding him guilty of one count of Overtaking and Passing Upon Right, in violation of Delaware City Code 331.04(b), a minor misdemeanor. The
State of Ohio is Plaintiff-Appellee.
{¶2} Assignment of error is as follows:
{¶3} “DEFENDANTS CONVICYION [SIC] WAS AGAINST THE MANIFEST
WEIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE.”
{¶4} We would begin by noting that Appellant fails to comply with App. R. 9(A).
App. R. 9(A) requires, in pertinent part:
{¶5} “(A) Composition of the record on appeal
{¶6} “The original papers and exhibits thereto filed in the trial court, the
transcript of proceedings, if any, including exhibits, and a certified copy of the docket
and journal entries prepared by the clerk of the trial court shall constitute the record on
appeal in all cases. A videotape recording of the proceedings constitutes the transcript
of proceedings other than hereinafter provided, and, for purposes of filing, need not be
transcribed into written form. Proceedings recorded by means other than videotape
must be transcribed into written form. When the written form is certified by the reporter
in accordance with App. R. 9(B), such written form shall then constitute the transcript of
proceedings. When the transcript of proceedings is in the videotape medium, counsel
shall type or print those portions of such transcript necessary for the court to determine
the questions presented, certify their accuracy, and append such copy of the portions of
the transcripts to their briefs.”
{¶7} In addition, the Ohio Supreme Court has stated in Knapp v. Edwards
Laboratories (1980), 61 Ohio St.2d 197, 199, 400 N.E.2d 284, “The duty to provide a
transcript for appellate review falls upon the appellant. This is necessarily so because an appellant bears the burden of showing error by reference to matters in the record.
See State v. Skaggs (1978), 53 Ohio St.2d 162, 372 N.E.2d 1355. This principle is
recognized in App.R. 9(B), which provides, in part, that ‘ * * * the appellant shall in
writing order from the reporter a complete transcript or a transcript of such parts of the
proceedings not already on file as he deems necessary for inclusion in the record * * *.’
When portions of the transcript necessary for resolution of assigned errors are omitted
from the record, the reviewing court has nothing to pass upon and thus, as to those
assigned errors, the court has no choice but to presume the validity of the lower court's
proceedings, and affirm.”
{¶8} Appellant raises a manifest weight of the evidence argument in
challenging his conviction. “When evaluating whether a conviction is contrary to the
manifest weight of the evidence, the appellate court must review the entire record,
weigh the evidence and all reasonable inferences, consider witness credibility, and
determine whether, in resolving conflicts in the evidence, the trier of fact clearly lost its
way and created such a manifest miscarriage of justice that the conviction must be
reversed and a new trial ordered.” State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380, at 387, 1997-
Ohio-52 (emphasis added), citing State v. Martin (1983), 20 Ohio App.3d 172, 175.
App.R. 9(B) also states, “If the appellant intends to urge on appeal that a finding or
conclusion is unsupported by the evidence or is contrary to the weight of the evidence,
the appellant shall include in the record a transcript of all evidence relevent to the
findings or conclusion.”
{¶9} Appellant failed to meet his burden by failing to provide a written transcript
of the entire trial proceedings. Although Appellant did attach twelve lines of transcript testimony to his brief, this is insufficient for this Court to properly rule upon Appellant’s
assignment of error, which would require this Court to consider the entirety of evidence.
Moreover, this Court has previously held that [f]actual assertions appearing in a party's
brief, but not in any papers submitted for consideration to the trial court below, do not
constitute part of the official record on appeal, and an appellate court may not consider
these assertions when deciding the merits of the case.” State v. Lewis, 5th Dist. No.
2006-CA-00066, 2007-Ohio-4783, ¶7, citing Akro-Plastics v. Drake Industries (1996),
115 Ohio App.3d 221, 226, 685 N.E.2d 246, 249.
{¶10} Accordingly, the judgment of the Delaware County Municipal Court is
affirmed.
By: Delaney, P.J.
Farmer, J. and
Wise, J. concur.
HON. PATRICIA A. DELANEY
HON. SHEILA G. FARMER
HON. JOHN W. WISE
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR DELAWARE COUNTY, OHIO
FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
STATE OF OHIO : : Plaintiff-Appellee : : : -vs- : JUDGMENT ENTRY : JAMES J. KENDRICK : : Defendant-Appellant : Case No. 10-CA-23 :
For the reasons stated in our accompanying Memorandum-Opinion on file, the
judgment of the Delaware County Municipal Court is affirmed. Costs assessed to
Appellant.
_________________________________ HON. PATRICIA A. DELANEY
_________________________________ HON. SHEILA G. FARMER
_________________________________ HON. JOHN W. WISE
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2011 Ohio 4433, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-kendrick-ohioctapp-2011.