Davis v. State of Ohio, Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Case No. CV96-312322
February 21, 2000
Ohio R. Evid. 801(D)(2)(b), Sam Sheppard, Ohio R. Evid. 404(b), Ohio R. Evid. 806, hearsay, admissions, character evidence, plaintiff's filing
Motion filed by the State to supplement the earlier motion to admit the unsworn statements of Dr. Samuel Sheppard. In this motion, the State made the following arguments in support of admitting Dr. Sheppard’s statements: (1) the statements are not offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted, but offered to prove that the statements were made and were inconsistent; (2) Dr. Sheppard’s innocence is less likely to be true by the very fact that his accounts altered over time. (3) Dr. Sheppard was made a hearsay declarant when other statements of his were admitted, thus opening his credibility for attack by the State, as would the credibility of any witness being cross examined pursuant to rule 806 of the Ohio rules of evidence; (4) the statements made by Sam H. Sheppard are “adoptive” party admissions, because of the implied belief in the truth of the statements made by the estate and representative of the Plaintiff, Sam R. Sheppard pursuant to rule 801(D)(2)(b). Finally, the State argued that the credibility of Sam H. Sheppard is now open for attack, as to the subject of him having a good marriage by Ohio case law and Rule 404(B).
Martin, Kathleen A. and Mason, William D., "Supplemental Memorandum Regarding Admissibility of Statements of Samuel H. and Memorandum Regarding Admissibility of Character Evidence of Samuel H. Sheppard" (2000). 1995-2002 Court Filings. 140.