In State v. Fitch (Apr. 17, 1998), 6th Dist. No. L-97-1316, 1998 Ohio App, the court noted that "'a missing witness inference based on an officer's absence has been relatively seldom allowed.'" Id., quoting Annotation, Adverse Presumption or Inference Based on State's Failure to Produce or Examine Law Enforcement Personnel-Modern Cases (1990), 81 A.L.R.4th 872, 878-92. In State v. Daugherty (1971), 26 Ohio App.2d 159, 163-64, 269 N.E.2d 849, the court held that the missing witness inference was not available when a police officer was "readily subject to legal process by the defendant as well as the state," and when the defendant gave no reason why he could not have issued subpoenas to the police officer. Id. at 164.