Opinion ID: 7089211
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Deletions from Kyker's Phone and Facebook Account

Text: {¶ 160} On direct examination, the prosecuting attorney asked Kyker whether anything unusual ever happen[ed] with regard[ ] to [her] cellphone and     Facebook [account]. A defense objection was overruled, and Kyker testified that one morning when she and Tench were on vacation, she woke up, looked at her cell phone, and saw that she had received a text message from another guy. She went back to sleep without deleting the message. Later that morning, she noticed that someone had deleted the message. She also testified, [G]uys were deleted off my Facebook that I didn't delete. But Kyker did not testify that Tench had deleted these items, nor did the state introduce any evidence that he had. 6 {¶ 161} Evidence of other acts is admissible if    there is substantial proof that the alleged other acts were committed by the defendant   . State v. Lowe , 69 Ohio St.3d 527 , 530, 634 N.E.2d 616 (1994). In this case, there was no evidence that Tench was responsible for the deletions. Even if he was, the deletions have no tendency to prove any fact of consequence to the determination of this case. Such evidence may throw light on Tench's relationship with Kyker, but it has nothing to do with whether he killed his mother. {¶ 162} The text-deletion evidence fails the first part of the Williams test: relevance. The trial court abused its discretion by overruling Tench's objection to admitting it.