[Cite as State v. Zimmer, 2017-Ohio-4440.]
Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA
JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 104946
STATE OF OHIO PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE
vs.
LEO A. ZIMMER DEFENDANT-APPELLANT
JUDGMENT: AFFIRMED
Criminal Appeal from the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Case No. CR-16-602862
BEFORE: Blackmon, J., E.T. Gallagher, P.J., and Celebrezze, J.
RELEASED AND JOURNALIZED: June 22, 2017
-i- ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT
Daniel J. Misiewicz Law Office of Daniel J. Misiewicz 614 Superior Avenue, Suite 1300 Cleveland, Ohio 44113
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
Michael C. O’Malley Cuyahoga County Prosecutor
By: Andrew F. Rogalski Assistant County Prosecutor Justice Center, 9th Floor 1200 Ontario Street Cleveland, Ohio 44113 PATRICIA ANN BLACKMON, J.:
{¶1} Leo A. Zimmer (“Zimmer”) appeals his convictions for various sexual
offenses and assigns the following errors for our review:
I. The trial court erred in denying defendant-appellant’s motion for acquittal pursuant to Ohio Criminal Rule 29.
II. Defendant-appellant’s convictions are against the manifest weight of
the evidence.
{¶2} Having reviewed the record and pertinent law, we affirm. The apposite
facts follow.
{¶3} On February 9, 2016, Zimmer was indicted for various sexual offenses
relating to A.C., whose date of birth is April 2, 1995, and A.B., whose date of birth is
October 26, 1991. The incidents were alleged to have occurred almost exclusively at
Zimmer’s family’s home on Pershing Avenue in Cleveland (“the Pershing house”)
between 1999 and 2009.
{¶4} On July 1, 2016, after a bench trial, the court found Zimmer guilty of two
counts of rape in violation of R.C. 2907.02(A)(1)(b); three counts of rape in violation of
R.C. 2907.02(A)(2); five counts of kidnapping in violation of R.C. 2905.01(A)(4); and
one count of gross sexual imposition (“GSI”) in violation of R.C. 2907.05(A)(4).
{¶5} On August 18, 2016, the court sentenced Zimmer to two terms of life in
prison for rape of a child under the age of 13; ten years in prison each for three counts of
forcible rape; and ten years in prison for the kidnapping associated with the GSI. The
other kidnapping convictions merged into the associated rape convictions, and the GSI merged into the associated kidnapping conviction. The court ordered all sentences to be
served concurrently.
{¶6} It is from these convictions that Zimmer appeals.
Sufficiency of the Evidence
{¶7} Crim.R. 29 mandates that the trial court issue a judgment of acquittal where
the prosecution’s evidence is insufficient to sustain a conviction for the offense. Crim.R.
29(A) and sufficiency of the evidence require the same analysis. State v. Taylor, 8th
Dist. Cuyahoga No. 100315, 2014-Ohio-3134.
An appellate court’s function when reviewing the sufficiency of the
evidence to support a criminal conviction is to examine the evidence
admitted at trial to determine whether such evidence, if believed, would
convince the average mind of the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable
doubt. 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.
State v. Driggins, 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 98073, 2012-Ohio-5287, ¶ 101, citing State v.
Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380, 386, 678 N.E.2d 541 (1997).
{¶8} In the case at hand, Zimmer argues that the state “failed to present any
evidence that [A.C. and A.B.] were ever moved or restrained in any way” in support of
his kidnapping convictions. Zimmer was convicted of five counts of kidnapping in
violation of R.C. 2905.01(A)(4), which states that “[n]o person, * * * in the case of a victim under the age of thirteen * * * by any means, shall remove another from the
place where the other is found or restrain the liberty of the other person, * * * [t]o engage
in sexual activity * * * with the victim against the victim’s will * * *.”
{¶9} In State v. Ramos, 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 103596, 2016-Ohio-7685, ¶ 14,
this court held that, concerning merged offenses, if “there is sufficient evidence to
support the offense on which the state elects to have the defendant sentenced, the
appellate court need not consider the sufficiency of the evidence on the count that is
subject to merger because any error would be harmless * * *.”
{¶10} Pursuant to Ramos, therefore, we need only consider the sufficiency of the
evidence concerning Zimmer’s kidnapping conviction associated with the GSI. This
kidnapping is charged in count eight of the indictment, which states that, between April
1999 and April 2001, Zimmer restrained A.C.’s liberty “by any means * * * for the
purpose of engaging in sexual activity * * *.” The indictment further states that A.C.
was four to five years old when this kidnapping occurred. It is important to note that,
because the victim was under the age of 13, the state need not prove that the kidnapping
was the result of force, threat, or deception.
{¶11} At trial, A.C. testified as follows about this incident.
{¶12} A.C. first met Zimmer when she was about five years old. A.C. spent “a lot
of time” at the Pershing house, because A.C.’s aunt was dating Zimmer. From the time
she was in second grade to the time she was in ninth grade, A.C. and her mom lived with
Zimmer and A.C.’s aunt in the Pershing house. According to A.C., other people also lived there, including Zimmer’s parents, Zimmer’s siblings and their spouses, and A.B.,
who is Zimmer’s great-niece.
{¶13} A.C. did not specifically remember the first time that Zimmer touched her
inappropriately, but she testified that “I have certain memories of me sitting on his lap,
and if I were to have a dress on or a skirt, his hand reaching up and just touching
inappropriately in ways, and * * * just fondling through, like, my clothes or under my
dresses if I were to be close to him or sitting on his lap.”
{¶14} A.C. recalled a specific incident that occurred at the home of Zimmer’s
cousin1 when A.C. was “about” in the second grade. “I was supposed to be sleeping on
the couch with my cousin in the living room while I believe [the adults] were playing
cards in the dining room, slash, kitchen. And [Zimmer] came to check on us, and we
weren’t sleeping yet. And I do remember him putting his hand in my pants that night. *
* * He played on the outside of my vagina.”
{¶15} This court has held that, in relation to kidnapping, “a child’s liberty may be
restrained through the inherent social/psychological pressures that accompany” an
adult-child familial relationship. State v. Weems, 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 102954,
2016-Ohio-701, ¶ 25. See also State v. Diaz, 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 103878,
2016-Ohio-5523. Given the tender age of A.C. when this GSI occurred, the fact that
Zimmer is 17 years older than A.C., and A.C.’s testimony that she was part of “the
1 This is the only evidence of abuse that took place outside of the Pershing house. Zimmer family unit,” we find sufficient evidence to show that A.C.’s liberty was
restrained when Zimmer molested her.
{¶16} Furthermore, after the defense moved for a Crim.R. 29 acquittal, the court
asked defense counsel whether there was a specific count or element of which the state
failed to introduce evidence. Defense counsel responded as follows: “Well, Your Honor,
I believe that they have touched upon every count that’s pending, so I don’t have anything
specific to point out.”
{¶17} Accordingly, Zimmer’s first assigned error is overruled.
Manifest Weight of the Evidence
{¶18} In State v. Wilson, 113 Ohio St.3d 382, 2007-Ohio-2202, 865 N.E.2d 1264,
¶ 25, the Ohio Supreme Court addressed the standard of review for a criminal manifest
weight challenge, as follows:
The criminal manifest-weight-of-the-evidence standard was explained in
State v. Thompkins (1997), 78 Ohio St.3d 380, 1997 Ohio 52, 678 N.E.2d
541. In Thompkins, the court distinguished between sufficiency of the
evidence and manifest weight of the evidence, finding that these concepts
differ both qualitatively and quantitatively. Id. at 386, 678 N.E.2d 541. The
court held that sufficiency of the evidence is a test of adequacy as to
whether the evidence is legally sufficient to support a verdict as a matter of
law, but weight of the evidence addresses the evidence’s effect of inducing
belief. Id. at 386-387, 678 N.E.2d 541. In other words, a reviewing court
asks whose evidence is more persuasive — the state’s or the defendant’s? We went on to hold that although there may be sufficient evidence to
support a judgment, it could nevertheless be against the manifest weight of
the evidence. Id. at 387, 678 N.E.2d 541. “When a court of appeals reverses
a judgment of a trial court on the basis that the verdict is against the weight
of the evidence, the appellate court sits as a ‘thirteenth juror’ and disagrees
with the factfinder’s resolution of the conflicting testimony.” Id. at 387, 678
N.E.2d 541, citing Tibbs v. Florida (1982), 457 U.S. 31, 42, 102 S.Ct. 2211,
72 L.Ed.2d 652.
{¶19} An appellate court may not merely substitute its view for that of the jury, but
must find that “in resolving conflicts in the evidence, the jury clearly lost its way and
created such a manifest miscarriage of justice that the conviction must be reversed and a
new trial ordered.” Thompkins at 387. Accordingly, reversal on manifest weight grounds
is reserved for “the exceptional case that the evidence weighs heavily against the
conviction.” Id.
{¶20} In the case at hand, Zimmer argues that various inconsistencies in the
witnesses’ testimony created “credibility issues” in the state’s case. For example, A.C.
failed to testify about the medical treatment she received after disclosing the abuse to her
mother, and Zimmer argues this “reflects on [her] credibility as a witness.” Additionally,
A.B. did not disclose the abuse until Zimmer began dating her uncle’s ex-wife, “a fact
which led to a great deal of animosity within the * * * house.” According to Zimmer,
A.B. “had personal motivation to see [him] punished,” and she failed to disclose the
abuse in a timely manner. Finally, Zimmer argues that the detective did not interview A.B.’s sister, who was allegedly in the room when one of the assaults occurred, nor did
the detective further investigate why A.C. was in counseling.
{¶21} A.C. testified that eventually Zimmer’s abuse escalated from inappropriate
touching to penetration and occurred “[i]n the bedroom or on the couch, depending on
where anybody else in the house was * * *.” A.C. testified about “being in a bedroom, in
a nightgown, under the blankets, watching a movie, and it was right after a bath. My
mother was not home. * * * And I remember him coming into the room and playing
around on the bed. And I remember being under the blanket and him going up under my
nightgown and penetrating my vagina” with his hands. A.C. believes she was “either
seven or eight years old” when this happened.
{¶22} A.C. also testified that Zimmer took her virginity when she was 13 years
old. According to A.C., Zimmer “climbed into the bed with me, and he reeked of
alcohol. And then he took my pants off, and he penetrated my vagina with his mouth,
and then climbed on top of me and proceeded to penetrate me with his penis. He stuck it
inside of me for — I don’t remember how long it lasted, but I know it didn’t last very
long.”
{¶23} A.C. testified that she did not say anything or try to stop Zimmer because
she was “kind of frozen” when it happened.
{¶24} A.C. testified that when she was 13 or 14 years old, she told her boyfriend
that Zimmer took her virginity. Additionally, when A.C. was 14 years old, she wrote a
letter to her mother telling her what Zimmer had done. A.C.’s mother did not talk to
A.C. for two days before they had a face-to-face conversation about the abuse. A.C. testified that she wanted Zimmer out of her life and she wanted “to forget about it.”
Neither A.C. nor her mother reported the allegations to anyone. According to A.C., her
mother’s reaction — or lack thereof — resulted in A.C. not going to the authorities to
report the abuse. “Her not speaking to me for two days, I think that played a big part in
me not going to anybody else. I didn’t want to see what anybody else’s reaction would
be.”
{¶25} A.B. also testified for the state about her allegations against Zimmer. A.B.
testified that she would spend “almost every weekend” and part of the summers at the
Pershing house from when she was in the third or fourth grade until she was 15 or 16
years old. Zimmer, who is A.B.’s great uncle, was living in the house. A.B. spent a lot
of time with A.C., who was also living there. Eventually the girls referred to each other
as “cousin.”
{¶26} A.B. testified that she was in the fourth or fifth grade when Zimmer first
inappropriately touched her. “I remember that my mom dropped me off there to go
Christmas shopping or something one time, and we were watching a movie on the couch
* * *. And I don’t remember the movie. But I remember that [Zimmer] got a blanket,
and then he started touching me on my vagina, and then he put his penis inside of me.”
{¶27} A.B. testified that although “[e]verything kinda meshes together,” she
recalled another specific incident of Zimmer molesting her when she was in the fourth or
fifth grade. A.B. was laying on a “roll out bed” under “white hospital blankets.” A.B.’s
sister and A.C. were on the couch, and the three girls were watching a movie. “And [Zimmer] came over and sat next to me and started touching me with his fingers inside
my vagina * * * [u]nderneath the blanket.”
{¶28} A.B. testified that on another occasion when she was in the sixth grade,
Zimmer “was wrapping Christmas presents in the attic at the Pershing house. And I went
upstairs, and he put me onto his lap and started kissing me, and then he started touching
me up there [and] through my pants.” A.B. recalled another incident that happened in
the upstairs unit of the house, where Zimmer’s father — who is A.B.’s great-grandfather
— lived. Zimmer, A.B., and the great-grandfather were in the living room watching TV.
Zimmer and A.B. were on the couch under a blanket, and Zimmer put his fingers inside
A.B.’s vagina. “I just remember [Zimmer] and great grandpa looking at each other, and
I felt like great grandpa knew what was going on.”
{¶29} A.B. further testified that Zimmer stopped abusing her when she was in the
eighth grade, because she “stopped hanging around the house so much.” A.B. testified
that she did not want these things to happen, but she did not tell Zimmer to stop because
“he was older than me, an adult. * * * I pretended like it never happened.” A.B. further
testified that she was scared, but she got “used to it.” Asked what she was scared of,
A.B. answered: “If I wanted him to stop and he didn’t. Because it could have been more
forceful if I would have said no.”
{¶30} Both victims testified consistently about when they eventually reported the
sexual abuse. On December 14, 2015, A.B. told A.C. via text messages that Zimmer was
dating a woman named Shawna, who had previously been married to A.B.’s uncle.
Shawna and A.B.’s uncle had children together, and A.B. was concerned about the possibility of those children being abused by Zimmer. A.C. testified that this
information made her “very sad and * * * very nervous because I had a feeling of what I
was going to have to do to make that feeling * * * in my stomach go away * * *.”
According to A.C., their main goal was about “protecting the kids.”
{¶31} The text messages between the two victims, which were introduced at trial,
follow:
A.B. Dude Leo is dating Shawna my uncles ex and she has 3 girls including my cousin * * *. What can we do to prevent anything from happening to them. * * *
A.C. Oh my god. I’m gonna have a panic attack.
A.B. Be careful with your thoughts and words. Let’s not manifest anything. Let’s just figure out the best way to save them together. [My sister] told me 2 days ago and I’ve thought about it a little but I just seen him post pics of all them on his [Facebook page].
A.C. [O]kay. Your right. But I know what’s gonna happen. I can’t let [it] happen.
A.B. We will stop it from happening. * * * My [other] uncle * * * is in Columbus. He told my mom he would try and get them but basically he gave up on being a dad. And now his kid[s’] mom is with that. * * *
A.C. I’ll do whatever I can. Tell your uncle what Leo did to us. We have to get involved to save them. I’m gonna be sick dude. I’ve had a bad feeling the past 2 days. M[y] chest has been heavy like something bad was gonna happen and now it makes sens[e]. * * *
A.B. * * * Do we get the courts involved, like how do we go about this? My uncle is not rational, and he’s not very smart.
A.C. * * * I think the courts should be involved. I’m scared.
A.B. * * * I’m scared too. * * * They are all so crazy. We can’t let that happen. Can we like call anonymous to social services? Do we put him in jail and go to the courts. [I don’t know] what to do or who to ask advice from about this. * * * But there’s kids involved now. I can’t live knowing I didn’t do anything to protect them.
A.C. We can’t be [anonymous] if we’re the prime witnesses. I’m gonna talk to someone tomorrow about it. See what we can do.
A.B. Okay. I’m hoping some solution comes to me in my dreams. Let’s stay connected tonight so we can figure it out together. I’m sorry I wasn’t there for you when this happened to you. I’m sorry I didn’t tell anybody sooner to protect you.
A.C. Do you work tomorrow and what time. I’m off all day. * * * I’m scared * * *. My chest has been so heavy and now it’s worse. I don’t like this. We have to save them. I love you. {¶32} A.C. and A.B. went to the Cleveland police station later that day and filed a
report.
{¶33} Asked why she and A.C. reported Zimmer’s abuse in December 2015, A.B.
testified, “Because I felt now is the time that we need to go to the authorities about what
happened to us to protect the kids.” A.B.’s testimony continued as follows:
I found out that Zimmer was dating * * * my uncle’s ex-wife * * *. And then a couple days later, a couple nights later I was on Facebook, and I saw that there were pictures with [Zimmer’s girlfriend’s] children on Facebook, Christmas pictures downtown. * * * I tried to avoid thinking about what could possibly be happening to those children. And when I saw the pictures, it just kinda hit me. And I texted [A.C.] and told her what I knew, and we made the decision to go forward and go to the authorities.
{¶34} A.B. testified that she was sexually abused by two other men and she
reported both of them to the authorities. However, she did not mention Zimmer abusing
her during either of these investigations. Additionally, A.B. testified that, subsequent to
the abuse, she saw Zimmer on a few social occasions but still did not report any of the
incidents to the authorities or another adult. {¶35} Asked to explain why her trial testimony was more detailed than the report
she previously gave to the police, A.B. stated as follows:
I spent my whole life pretending like this never happened. And when I made the — I don’t want to say rash, but maybe rash decision to come to the authorities about what happened, I never fully collected all of my thoughts. We just kinda did it, you know, I just told people what happened. And over time I started opening up different parts of my brain and digging deeper into my subconscious to pull out different memories. * * * I grabbed a notebook, and I just started writing different things to take myself back there.
{¶36} A.B. also sent an email to the detective prior to trial: “I’m sorry that I
couldn’t have gotten these memories together beforehand, and I had to dig deep into my
subconscious to find them. And it was really hard because I’m trying not to drive myself
crazy with them, memories of what happened.”
{¶37} A.C.’s ex-boyfriend testified that the two dated when A.C. was 13 to 16
years old. He testified that he no longer had any contact with A.C., he did not like A.C.,
and he was “extremely pissed” that he had to testify. Nonetheless, the ex-boyfriend
stated that in 2009, when they were dating, A.C. told him she lost her virginity to Zimmer
when Zimmer raped her. This testimony corroborates A.C.’s testimony.
{¶38} Lillian, who is A.C.’s mom, testified that in 2010, she received a letter from
her daughter A.C., when A.C. was 14 years old, accusing Zimmer of inappropriately
touching her and A.B. when they had spent the night at the Pershing house in the past.
This corroborates A.C.’s testimony. According to Lillian, A.C. did not want to talk
about the details nor did she want to report the abuse to the authorities. Lillian took A.C.
to a counselor. “I did my best to get her to open up to me, and she was not comfortable talking to me. And I thought that maybe a professional would be better * * *.”
However, A.C. “only went to a few sessions” then “made a decision not to go any
further.”
{¶39} Lillian testified that she did not know about this trial until the state called
her the night before her testimony. She was caught off guard and told them what she
could; however, she did not think to tell them over the phone that A.C. saw a counselor.
According to Lillian, this is why the counseling was brought up for the first time during
her testimony.
{¶40} Cleveland Police Detective Richard Durst testified that he interviewed A.C.
and A.B. on the same day, but separately. According to Durst, during his seven years as
a detective in the sex crimes unit, he has experience with cases involving “delayed
disclosure” of abuse of minor children. Asked how common this is, Durst replied, “I
would say it’s a third of my case load.” Detective Durst testified that both A.C. and A.B.
stated they decided to come forward with the allegations after seeing pictures on
Facebook of Zimmer with his girlfriend’s small children.
{¶41} Durst was asked if he interviewed J.B., who is A.B.’s sister, and he said,
“No.” Durst testified that he first learned that A.C. allegedly went to a counselor about
being molested by Zimmer during Zimmer’s trial. He also testified that, by law, if felony
sexual abuse had been reported to a counselor, that counselor would be obligated to turn
the information over to the authorities.
{¶42} Shawna Kerns, who testified for the defense, stated that she is currently
dating Zimmer, but used to be married to Zimmer’s nephew. Kerns is an aunt to A.B. and a family friend to A.C. Kerns was close with both girls when they were living and/or
staying at the Pershing house; however, their relationships deteriorated by 2010 after
Kerns’s divorce. Her four kids are in the Cuyahoga County Department of Children and
Family Services system relating to domestic abuse by Kerns’s ex-boyfriend. Zimmer
currently watches her kids at times when she is working, and Kerns told the social worker
about the allegations against Zimmer. The social worker interviewed Kerns’s four
children, but the county did not take any action as a result of the interviews.
{¶43} Zimmer’s mother and sister also testified on behalf of the defense. They
both testified that they have lived in the upstairs part of the Pershing house since the
1970s. They also testified about the various times they saw A.B. and A.C. over the years
at the Pershing house and family functions, but that neither A.B. nor A.C. ever mentioned
that Zimmer sexually abused them.
{¶44} In reviewing this evidence, we cannot say that the court lost its way in
convicting Zimmer of raping and kidnapping A.B. and A.C. when they were children.
The delayed disclosure and failure to initially report all the details testified to at trial are
the result of A.B. and A.C. pretending the abuse did not happen, because of the
circumstances under which they were raised. As the court stated when it found Zimmer
guilty, it “was not particularly surprised that the evidence was necessarily lacking in some
detail,” because the abuse took place “somewhere between 10 and 17 years ago” and the
“victims were young.” The court found that A.B. and A.C. “came from somewhat
chaotic family circumstances,” including “the distinct impression from the evidence that
Lillian * * * was not perhaps a stellar parent * * *.” {¶45} Additionally, the court stated that Zimmer’s “household [was] crowded with
different adults, adults that would have no direct or immediate responsibility for either
[A.C. or A.B.] when they were dropped off there or staying there or living there.” The
court further stated that “it was clear * * * that non-immediate family members were
permitted to move into 5080 Pershing as needed, and they might be accompanied by a
spouse or children.” The court continued:
So I paint that picture because when one looks back and asks the question how could events like this be occurring with no one noticing, it struck the Court that this very loose amalgam of human beings with no direct responsibilities for young children might well explain how things like this could occur with no one paying particular attention.
{¶46} Upon review of the record, we find consistent and credible evidence for why
the victims delayed reporting the abuse and why A.C. did not testify about counseling she
allegedly received after the abuse. Additionally, we find that the detective’s failure to
interview J.B. about her recollections of the allegations is not an issue. “It is well settled
that a rape conviction may rest solely on the victim’s testimony, if believed * * *.” State
v. Patterson, 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 100086, 2014-Ohio-1621, ¶ 40. “There is no
requirement that a rape victim’s testimony be corroborated as a condition precedent to
conviction.” State v. Lewis, 70 Ohio App.3d 624, 638, 591 N.E.2d 854 (4th Dist.1990).
{¶47} Accordingly, we find that Zimmer’s convictions were not against the weight
of the evidence, and his second assigned error is overruled.
{¶48} Judgment affirmed.
It is ordered that appellee recover of appellant its costs herein taxed.
The court finds there were reasonable grounds for this appeal. It is ordered that a special mandate be sent to the Cuyahoga County Court of
Common Pleas to carry this judgment into execution. The defendant’s conviction having
been affirmed, any bail pending appeal is terminated. Case remanded to the trial court
for execution of sentence.
A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to Rule 27 of
the Rules of Appellate Procedure.
PATRICIA ANN BLACKMON, JUDGE
EILEEN T. GALLAGHER, P.J., and FRANK D. CELEBREZZE, JR., J., CONCUR