Legal Opinion

State v. Economo

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided July 10, 1996No. 95-53PublishedCited by 43 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCook, J.

I

R.C. 2907.06(B) states: “No person shall be convicted of a violation of this section [sexual imposition3] solely upon the victim’s testimony unsupported by other evidence.”

*58With this opinion we answer the question of what quality of evidence will satisfy the “other evidence” or corroboration requirement of R.C. 2907.06(B). As addressed later, corroboration requirements such as the one in R.C. 2907.06(B) are rare.4 We are aware of no other sections of the current Ohio criminal code mandating corroboration of a victim’s testimony as a prerequisite to conviction.5 For guidance, we look to this…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. State v. JenksOhio Supreme Court · 1991
  2. People v. Rincon-PinedaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
  3. State v. ChambersSupreme Court of Georgia · 1977
  4. Fitzgerald v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1982
  5. Evans v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1973

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by43 opinions

  1. State v. PetwayOhio Court of Appeals · 2020
  2. State v. BressiOhio Court of Appeals · 2016
  3. State v. BevlyOhio Supreme Court · 2015
  4. Muncy v. American Select InsuranceOhio Court of Appeals · 1998
  5. State v. AdhikariOhio Court of Appeals · 2017

38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API