# State v. Smith

> Ohio Court of Appeals · December 31, 1992 · 84 Ohio App. 3d 647

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3722850

## Case

- **Full name:** The STATE of Ohio, Appellee, v. SMITH, Appellant
- **Court:** Ohio Court of Appeals
- **Decided:** December 31, 1992
- **Citations:** 84 Ohio App. 3d 647; 617 N.E.2d 1160; 1992 Ohio App. LEXIS 6632
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Brogan
- **Judges:** Grady, Fain, Brogan
- **Cited by:** 72 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3722850

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- stating that other acts "evidence is never admissible when its sole purpose is to establish that the defendant committed the act alleged of him in the indictment"

## Opinion text

*669
Brogan, Judge,
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
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.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3722850. Public record. Not legal advice.