Login | June 04, 2025
Partial reversal in Portage County child rape case
TRACEY BLAIR
Legal News Reporter
Published: February 7, 2020
A man convicted of abducting and raping an 8-year-old girl must be resentenced because a Portage County judge merged two counts – yet sentenced the defendant on each count.
Richard B. Doak was convicted by a jury of rape and gross sexual imposition.
On April 19, 2016, S.A. mother of the victim, I.A. , left her three children at her Ravenna Township home with Jason Williams, her live-in boyfriend, while she went to work. The children included I.A., I.A.’s sister, and I.A.’s half-brother.
According to case summary, while Williams was doing house work, appellant, S.A.’s uncle, arrived at the residence. Doak asked Williams if he could take I.A. out to his truck for a few minutes. Williams, who noticed a pronounced odor of alcohol, declined. After several more requests, Williams gave in.
Williams then noticed Doak, I.A., and the truck were gone. He immediately called mother, who called the police. The Portage County Sheriff’s Department issued an AMBER alert, and Doak returned to the home with I.A. after nearly two hours.
Doak was ordered out of the truck. A deputy noticed I.A. was crying and trembling. The child told the deputy that appellant was mean to her and that she repeatedly asked appellant to take her home but he refused.
Doak failed field sobriety tests and was arrested for OVI and child endangering.
Eight months later, I.A. disclosed that, while visiting her father in Summit County, one of her step brothers had “sex” with her. I.A. told the nurse she had a similar encounter with an adult, later identified as Doak. I.A. stated appellant had “sex” with her in a men’s bathroom at a park. The nurse notified the sheriff’s office of the new allegation.
Appellant confirmed he took I.A. to the park that day, but denied any inappropriate conduct.
With respect to the rape count, the jury made the additional finding that the victim was less than 10 years old at the time of the offense. Regarding the gross sexual imposition count, the jury also found the victim was less than 13 years old at the time of the offense.
The trial court found that the gross sexual imposition count merged with the rape count, and Doak was sentenced to life in prison without parole eligibility. The court also sentenced appellant to five years imprisonment for the gross sexual imposition count and ordered the terms to be served concurrently.
“Notwithstanding the court’s agreement that the counts must merge, it nevertheless sentenced appellant on both, imposed a five-year term of imprisonment for the gross sexual imposition, and ordered the counts to be served concurrently. This was error. Accordingly, the case must be reversed and remanded for resentencing,” 11th District Court of Appeals Judge Cynthia Westcott Rice said in her 3-0 opinion.
Appellate judges Mary Jane Trapp and Timothy P. Cannon concurred.
The panel rejected all of Doak’s assignments of error, but a review of the record demonstrated two additional issues that must be addressed sua sponte – the merger issue and the failure to address post-release control.
The 11th District rejected Doak’s arguments of insufficient evidence and an improper closing argument by the state. The panel also disagreed with his theory that the trial court erred in admitting the video of I.A.’s interview with the nurse.
“It is … worth noting that the interview was not conducted based upon the underlying allegation against appellant; rather, I.A. was being interviewed at CAC for allegations of sexual conduct which allegedly occurred between I.A. and her step brother in Summit County,” Rice said in her opinion. “In the course of discussing the details of that incident, I.A. spontaneously volunteered information relating to the underlying incident, which involved an adult family member.
“This disclosure prompted additional concerns regarding I.A.’s physical and emotional well-being because the initial allegations involved other children, which Nurse Andel noted could be, from I.A.’s young perspective, viewed as more of a game. The underlying allegation, however, focused upon an adult family member, a person of potential authority and greater influence. These points, in conjunction with the potential for more significant physical harm due to the size disparity, triggered additional concerns for I.A.’s medico-psychological health.”
The case is State v. Doak, 2020-Ohio-66.