State v. Smith

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided December 31, 1992

Ohio Court of Appeals · decided 1992-12-31

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1992-12-31

How this case has been cited

Cited by 66 later decisions — most recently February 2026 · most notably 138 Ohio App. 3d 449 - State v. Hawn (2000), State v. Lipka (2002)

66 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

*669 Brogan, Judge,

¶1 concurring in part and dissenting in part.

¶2 I concur for the reason that the trial court committed prejudicial error in admitting the other acts testimony. I do not find that the trial court erred in admitting Dr. Bergman’s testimony. I do not believe that an ordinary juror would be conversant with the behavioral patterns of pedophiles. The defendant invited the introduction of this testimony and I would defer to the trial court’s determination that the probative value of this testimony did not outweigh its prejudicial impact.