State v. Curtiss
| Docket Number | 29006 |
| Decision Date | 21 January 2022 |
| Parties | STATE OF OHIO Plaintiff-Appellee v. TEAVEN CURTISS Defendant-Appellant |
| Court | Ohio Court of Appeals |
Criminal Appeal from Common Pleas Court Trial Court Case No 2019-CR-1088
MATHIAS H. HECK, JR., by J. JOSHUA RIZZO, Atty. Reg. No 0099218, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, Attorney for Plaintiff-Appellee
ERIC G. ECKES, Atty. Reg. No. 0091840 and STEPHANIE F. KESSLER, Atty. Reg. No. 0092338, 455 Attorneys for Defendant-Appellant
{¶ 1} Defendant-Appellant, Teaven Curtiss, appeals from his conviction on one count of rape of a child under ten years of age and one count of gross sexual imposition of a person less than thirteen years of age. In support of his appeal, Curtiss presents ten assignments of error. For the reasons discussed below, we find that the first and second assignments of error have merit and they are sustained. The second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, and ninth assignments of error are overruled, and the tenth assignment of error is overruled as moot. Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court will be reversed, and this cause will be remanded for further proceedings.
{¶ 2} On June 24, 2020, Curtiss was indicted on one count of rape of a person less than ten years of age, a first-degree felony, and one count of gross sexual imposition of a person less than 13 years of age, a third-degree felony. The acts in question were alleged to have occurred between November 3, 2017, and October 30, 2018.
{¶ 3} Curtiss was arraigned on July 7, 2020, and pled not guilty to the charges. Bond was set in the amount of $500, 000 cash surety, plus electronic home detention. After a bond hearing on July 16, 2020, the court continued the bond as before. Transcript of Proceedings, Vol. I ("Tr."), p. 40. On July 24, 2020, Curtiss posted bond and was ordered released from jail. Subsequently, on July 27, 2020, Curtiss filed a motion requesting an order for an in-camera review of records from Montgomery County Children Services ("MCCS") involving two children, "Kevin," born in 2012, and "Kathy," born in 2013.[1] On August 7, 2020, the court ordered an in camera review. The court then filed Court's Ex. I (a compact disc containing a complete copy of the MCCS file) under seal on September 2, 2020. Also filed under seal on the same day was Court's Ex. II, a printout of the records the court found relevant and discoverable and which were provided to defense counsel.
{¶ 4} On September 25, 2020, Curtiss filed a motion to suppress, which was ultimately heard on November 12 and 18, 2020. In the meantime, on September 29, 2020, the State filed a notice of an intent to introduce child statement evidence pursuant to Evid.R. 807 and a request for a hearing. This was with regard to Kathy's statements. However, before the November 12, 2020 hearing, the court interviewed Kathy and determined that she was competent to testify. Tr. at p. 53. However, the court overruled the suppression motion, based on a finding that the search was constitutional. Id. at p. 121.
{¶ 5} On November 23, 2020, the State filed a motion asking the court to review further MCCS records in camera and to release additional information to the defense, based on what had occurred during the November hearings. The State noted that Kathy's mother ("Mother") had said during the hearing that her children had been removed due to a domestic violence incident involving Mother's ex-boyfriend. As a result, according to the State, the "circumstances surrounding the removal are now at issue and may be relevant at trial." Motion for Court to Review In Camera Children's Services Records (November 23, 2020), p. 2.
{¶ 6} The trial court did not file a written decision on this motion prior to trial, which began on December 7, 2020, but it did indicate during the final pretrial hearing on December 1, 2020, that defense counsel would be provided with some additional pages of MCCS records. Tr. 1 at p. 124. The court also filed and sealed those records as Court's Ex. I and II on December 17, 2020. Id. at p. 125.
{¶ 7} In the meantime, on December 3, 2020, the State filed a motion in limine seeking to prohibit Curtiss from introducing any evidence or testimony pertaining to Kathy's other disclosures of sexual abuse. The disclosures in question involved Curtiss's son, J.C., who had been adjudicated a juvenile sex offender against a child in another county and was living with Curtiss when Kathy was in the home.
{¶ 8} The same day, the State filed another motion in limine asking the court to prohibit the defense from introducing any evidence relating to a caseworker's opinion that Kathy's brother, Kevin, had been coached to make disclosures. Subsequently, Curtiss filed a motion in limine on December 6, 2020, asking the court to preclude any testimony relating to statements that Kevin made, because the State was not calling him as a witness at trial.
{¶ 9} After jury selection, the court sustained the State's motion to prohibit evidence of other disclosures of sexual abuse. Tr. at p. 296-297. With respect to Kevin's testimony, the court agreed with the defense that Evid.R. 807 did not apply because Kevin was not the victim in the case. However, the court deferred ruling on other bases for admission of Kevin's testimony that the State might argue. Id. at p. 298-299. Finally, the court agreed with the State that the caseworker would not be permitted to give an expert opinion on coaching. Id. at p. 299.
{¶ 10} During trial, the court then decided, over the defense objection, to allow Kevin's forensic interview to be played, even though Kevin had not been called to testify. Tr. at p. 636-637. Ultimately, after hearing the evidence, the jury found Curtiss guilty on both charges. The court then sentenced Curtiss to life in prison without the possibility of parole on the rape charge and to a 60-month sentence for gross sexual imposition, to be served consecutively. Following the judgment, Curtiss filed a timely appeal, and he has raised ten assignments of error.
{¶ 11} Curtiss's first assignment of error states that:
The Trial Court Erred When It Failed to Disclose Relevant MCCS Records in Violation of Curtiss's Right to Due Process and a Fair Trial.
{¶ 12} Under this assignment of error, Curtiss argues that the trial court erred in failing to disclose material records from MCCS that would have changed the outcome of this case. The records in question were contained in two sets of documents both marked as Court Ex. I, which the court reviewed in camera. The first Court's Ex. I, filed under seal on September 2, 2020, was a compact disc containing 124 separate records. It consisted of hundreds of pages of MCCS records, including an MCCS activity log from October 13, 2018, to February 2, 2020. The documents released to Curtiss were contained in Court's Ex. II, filed under seal on September 2, 2020.
{¶ 13} The second Court's Ex. I, filed on December 17, 2020, contains an MCCS activity log from May 11, 2017, to August 2, 2017. The second Court's Ex. II contains redacted records from this Ex. I, and was filed under seal on December 17, 2020.
{¶ 14} All of these records were reviewed for purposes of deciding Curtiss's appeal. In view of this review, a discussion of some further factual background of the case is appropriate.
{¶ 15} The alleged victim, Kathy, was born in September 2013, and her brother, Kevin, was born in June 2012. Mother also had two other children: a daughter Laura, who was born in April 2017, and a son, David, who was born in December 2018. Tr. at p. 380.[2] K.C. was Kathy and Kevin's father, and another man, D.H., was the father of the two younger children. Id. at p. 382.
{¶ 16} K.C. was not involved with Kathy and Kevin, but his father, Teaven Curtiss, became involved in their lives when Kathy was two or three years old. Id. at p. 384. After Curtiss became involved, Kathy and Kevin stayed every other weekend at the home of Curtiss and his wife, T.C. Id. at p. 386 and 823. Other grandchildren came to stay at the house as well, and Curtiss and T.C. took them to parks, to the pool, and to eat. They also played with them, watched movies, and celebrated special occasions like birthdays, Christmas, and Easter. Id. at p. 822 and 853.
{¶ 17} Beginning in January 2017, MCCS investigated Mother's family for concerns of physical abuse. Id. at p. 429. After MCCS became involved, the three children were still living with Mother, pursuant to a safety plan. Id. at 424. At the time, Mother was romantically involved with D.H., who, as noted, was Laura's father.
{¶ 18} According to Mother, a domestic violence situation occurred with D.H., in which Mother was the victim. As a result, her children were taken away from her and placed in foster care. Mother also stated that there were no incidents of domestic violence between her and D.H. before the children were removed. Id. at 422-423. In addition, Mother said that abuse of the children was not involved; instead, the physical abuse was between Mother and D.H., and they just had one domestic violence incident. Id. at 382 and 426.[3]
{¶ 19} After being removed from Mother's home on August 10, 2017, Kathy and Laura were placed in foster care until November 2017. Tr. at p. 383, 424, and 823. At that point, Kathy went to live with Curtiss and T.C., and Laura went to live with Mother's father and step-mother. Id. According to Mother, Kevin was placed in an orphanage until December 15, 2017, when he went to Curtiss's house. Id. at p. 427.[4] In December 2017, Mother gave birth to her fourth child, David, whose father, D.H., had...
To continue reading
Request your trial