State v. Normile

Citations

• 2026 Ohio 1052

Syllabus

Crim.R. 29; sufficiency of the evidence; strangulation; domestic violence; R.C. 2903.18(B)(3); R.C. 2919.25(A); hearsay; plain error; Crim.R. 52(B). Judgment affirmed. After viewing the evidence against the defendant-appellant in a light most favorable to the State — and absent authority cited to the contrary — we find that the trial court could reasonably conclude from substantial evidence that the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt that he (1) knowingly caused or created a substantial risk of physical harm to the victim, his then wife, by means of strangulation or suffocation in violation of R.C. 2903.18(B)(3) and (2) knowingly caused or attempted to cause physical harm to the victim in violation of R.C. 2919.25(A). Thus, we find that the defendant-appellant's strangulation and domestic-violence convictions are supported by sufficient evidence and his Crim.R. 29 motions for acquittal were properly denied. Moreover, we decline to address the defendant-appellant's second assignment of error — claiming that portions of two officers' testimony amounted to inadmissible hearsay — since no objections were raised at the trial-court level and defendant-appellant failed to make a plain-error argument on appeal.