A recent appellate case involves two legal issues which are often litigated in Vehicular Homicide and Vehicular Assault cases in Ohio. The first issue is the admissibility of expert witness testimony. The second issue is whether the jury should be instructed about the option of finding the defendant guilty of a lesser offense. The case is State v. Horst.
In Ohio DUI/OVI cases, the prosecution sometimes introduces expert testimony. If a prosecutor intends to do so, the prosecutor must provide the defense attorney with a written report summarizing the expert’s testimony. According to the Ohio discovery rules, the report must be disclosed to defense counsel at least 21 days prior to trial. What happens when the report does not contain all the expert’s testimony or isn’t provided timely? A recent decision from the Ohio Supreme Court answers that question.
OVI trials sometimes involve testimony from expert witnesses. Those witnesses include pharmacologists who testify about the accuracy of the defendant’s breath test result. A recent decision from an Ohio Court of Appeals demonstrates the importance of assessing the quality of the expert witness report and evaluating the utility of anticipated expert testimony.
Columbus OVI/DUI Attorney Blog