State v. Antolini

Citations

• 2025 Ohio 2060

Syllabus

AGGRAVATED MENACING — SERIOUS PHYSICAL HARM — JURY INSTRUCTION — PLAIN ERROR — SUFFICIENCY AND WEIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE: Where defendant was charged with aggravated menacing, the trial court did not commit plain error in providing the jury with the definition of physical harm rather than serious physical harm where the trial court instructed the jury that it had to find that the victim believed defendant would cause her serious physical harm before finding defendant guilty of aggravated menacing, the State highlighted the difference between serious physical harm and physical harm during closing arguments, and the evidence supported a finding of a threat of serious physical harm. Where the evidence established that victim had a subjective belief of fear of serious physical harm, defendant's conviction for aggravated menacing was supported by sufficient evidence and was not against the manifest weight of the evidence.