State v. Abbott, 2026-Ohio-2127

Background

Abbott was indicted for rape and felonious assault after allegedly sexually assaulting his cellmate Bradley in jail while knowing he was HIV-positive. 1
At trial, Officer Snelling testified he saw Abbott in Bradley’s groin area making an up-and-down motion and believed Abbott was performing oral sex. 2
Bradley testified Abbott comforted him, rubbed his back, then pulled down his pants and performed oral sex without consent or HIV disclosure. 3
The jury acquitted Abbott of rape but convicted him of second-degree felony felonious assault under R.C. 2903.11(B)(1). 4
Abbott appealed, arguing the conviction was unsupported by sufficient evidence and against the manifest weight of the evidence. 5
The appellate court affirmed, relying on Bradley’s testimony, Snelling’s eyewitness account, and DNA evidence linking Abbott to Bradley’s penis. 6

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the felonious assault conviction was supported by sufficient evidence 7	Abbott claimed no rational juror could find oral sex beyond a reasonable doubt.	State argued Bradley, Snelling, and DNA proved the offense.	The conviction was supported by sufficient evidence. 8
Whether the verdict was against the manifest weight of the evidence 9	Abbott argued Bradley lied, Snelling did not clearly observe oral sex, and DNA was equivocal.	State contended the jury could credit its witnesses and evidence.	The verdict was not against the manifest weight of the evidence. 10

Key Cases Cited

State v. Evans, 2026-Ohio-1237 (12th Dist. 2026) (sufficiency and manifest-weight standards are distinct 11)
State v. Boles, 2013-Ohio-5202 (12th Dist. 2013) (sufficiency reviews the State’s burden of production 12)
State v. Roper, 2022-Ohio-244 (12th Dist. 2022) (sufficiency asks whether any rational trier of fact could find the elements beyond a reasonable doubt 13)
State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (Ohio 1991) (classic sufficiency standard 14)
State v. Carter, 2018-Ohio-29 (8th Dist. 2018) (appellate courts assess whether evidence, if believed, supports conviction 15)
State v. Brummett, 2024-Ohio-2332 (12th Dist. 2024) (sufficiency asks whether any record evidence could support the elements 16)
State v. McCollum, 2026-Ohio-393 (12th Dist. 2026) (manifest weight concerns the State’s burden of persuasion 17)
State v. Messenger, 2022-Ohio-4562 (12th Dist. 2022) (manifest-weight standard source 18)
State v. Brown, 2025-Ohio-2804 (12th Dist. 2025) (appellate court acts as thirteenth juror on manifest-weight review 19)
State v. Jordan, 2023-Ohio-3800 (12th Dist. 2023) (manifest-weight reversal requires a miscarriage of justice 20)
State v. Nkoyi, 2024-Ohio-3144 (12th Dist. 2024) (manifest-weight reversal is rare and exceptional 21)
State v. Palma, 2025-Ohio-1318 (12th Dist. 2025) (manifest-weight reversal occurs only with unanimous disagreement with the verdict 22)
State v. Roark, 2013-Ohio-217 (12th Dist. 2013) (fellatio constitutes sexual conduct 23)
State v. Batista, 2017-Ohio-8304 (12th Dist. 2017) (R.C. 2903.11(B)(1) regulates conduct and is constitutionally valid 24)
State v. Eads, 2025-Ohio-2815 (12th Dist. 2025) (jury may believe all, part, or none of any witness’s testimony 25)
State v. Bedsole, 2022-Ohio-3693 (12th Dist. 2022) (credibility determinations belong to the factfinder 26)
State v. MacPhereson, 2024-Ohio-5359 (12th Dist. 2024) (conflicting evidence does not make a conviction against the manifest weight 27)
State v. Archie, 2025-Ohio-5577 (11th Dist. 2025) (a finding that a verdict is not against the manifest weight includes sufficiency 28)
State v. Worship, 2022-Ohio-52 (12th Dist. 2022) (felonious assault conviction stands where substantial evidence proves the offense 29)