Trending
WARREN -- A 26-year-old Youngstown man sentenced to two life sentences appealed his case to the Ohio 11th District Court of Appeals on Thursday in hopes of earning a new trial.
Darrl Mack's appeal was filed in Trumbull County on April 21. In March, Mack was found guilty of three counts of rape and three counts of sexual imposition against three girls under the age of 13.
The jury deliberated for about two hours before finding Mack guilty, which concluded a two-day trial involving three minors, ages 6, 8 and 10 at the time of trial. Mack babysat the victims during the duration of the abuse, which occurred during the spring of 2021.
Defense attorney Eric M. Levy claimed before a three-judge panel that the trial court erred when they did not omit testimony from Monique Malmer, a child advocacy center nurse practitioner.
During the trial, Malmer testified about interviews she witnessed behind a two-way mirror conducted by Trumbull County Children Services caseworker Kelly Watson.
Watson interviewed the three victims at a Boardman hospital.
Levy argued that the children's statements during those interviews were made for the purpose of a forensic investigation not for medical treatment. He said that action should have made them inadmissible.
Levy claimed the children were not made aware the interviews would be heard by a medical professional and said they were instructed on how to answer interview questions. He added they were rewarded with high fives for specific answers.
Levy also noted that the medical exam, conducted a year after the reported abuse, wasn't expected to find physical evidence of a sexual encounter.
"It was essentially a sham examination just so they could say later on at trial, 'Hey a medical examiner came up here so this interview was for medical purposes,'" Levy said.
Levy also pointed out that police suggested questions for the interview.
Arguing for the state, Assistant Prosecutor Ryan Sanders said that the Malmer testimony was not a "prejudgment" but it was one necessary to guide her through the examination process.
Sanders said the purpose of Malmer observing the interviews was to "identify the type of exposure the victims were involved with, the body parts used, the timeline of events, as well as the details of the events to guide her and assist her in how to examine the bodies, in terms of what to look for."
Sanders indicated that just because nothing was found, which was considered likely to be the case beforehand, the situation was not "prejudged" or "preconcluded."
Levy said police were providing answers during the interviews and questioned if that works against the state's argument.
Sanders said the police only directed one or two questions that attempted to determine when the sexual abuse took place and who committed it.
Sanders said Malmer testified that questions from police would have been asked by her regardless of their suggestion.
To dispute the claim that the victims were coached, Sanders said the victims were asked open-ended questions and nonleading questions that "let them tell the narrative to the social worker about what happened."