State v. Adkins, 2016 Ohio 7250

Background

24-day-old infant (M.A.) was taken to SOMC on Aug 3, 2013 with right-leg tenderness; x‑rays and subsequent evaluation at Nationwide Children’s Hospital revealed multiple acute "corner/bucket‑handle" fractures of the legs and abdominal bruising, injuries the treating radiologists/child‑abuse specialists deemed highly suggestive of non‑accidental trauma.
Parents Michael (defendant) and Christi Adkins initially gave a history that the baby had kicked Michael the day before; medical experts testified an infant that age could not have caused those fractures by kicking and that the pattern indicated twisting, pulling, shaking or blunt force.
Appellant was charged with felonious assault and child endangering; acquitted of assault but convicted by a jury of child endangering (R.C. 2919.22(B)(1)(E)(2)(d)) and appealed, contesting sufficiency and manifest weight of the evidence.
State’s case relied largely on medical expert testimony tying injury timing and mechanism to abuse, investigators’ testimony that Michael was the caregiver with opportunity when symptoms first appeared, and inconsistencies in parents’ accounts; defense presented family/friends’ testimony supporting Michael’s character and alternative, non‑specific potential sources of injury.
The Fourth District (McFarland, J.) reviewed Jackson/Jenks sufficiency standards and Eastley/Thompkins manifest‑weight standards, concluded circumstantial evidence and expert opinion provided a rational basis for the jury to find Michael guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and affirmed the conviction.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Adkins)	Held
Sufficiency: Was there legally sufficient evidence to convict Adkins of felony child endangering?	Medical and investigative evidence, plus evidence Adkins was sole caregiver during the 2–3 hour window when symptoms began, supported a finding beyond a reasonable doubt.	Evidence was circumstantial and did not identify a perpetrator; multiple people had access to the infant during the relevant period and experts could only date fractures to a multi‑day window.	Yes — conviction affirmed: viewed in light most favorable to State, a rational trier of fact could find elements proven.
Manifest weight: Did the conviction against the manifest weight of the evidence?	Jury properly weighed conflicting testimony and credited State’s theory; credibility is for the jury.	Jury clearly lost its way given medical uncertainty about exact timing/causation and many favorable witnesses for defendant.	No — not the exceptional case warranting reversal; appellate court defers to jury credibility determinations.
Timing of injury: Could experts pinpoint when fractures occurred so as to link them to the interval Adkins was alone with the infant?	Experts linked symptom onset and fracture acuity to a recent injury consistent with the 2–3 hour window; pediatric records showed no earlier signs.	Experts gave broader ranges (7–14 days); medical testimony could not fix a precise minute/hour or identify who caused injury.	Court credited medical testimony and contemporaneous pediatric records sufficiently to permit the jury to find injury timing consistent with State’s timeline.
Role of circumstantial evidence in proving abuse/perpetrator	Circumstantial evidence can be sufficient; here medical findings, opportunity, inconsistent statements, and exclusion of others supported inference that Adkins caused the injuries.	Reliance on circumstantial proof like in Miley makes conviction legally insufficient when multiple caregivers had access.	Circumstantial evidence sufficed here (distinguishing Miley): jury could infer Adkins was sole caregiver during the critical period and convict.

Key Cases Cited

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (establishes standard for sufficiency review)
State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (Ohio standard for sufficiency of the evidence)
State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (discusses weight of the evidence review)
Eastley v. Volkman, 132 Ohio St.3d 328 (clarifies manifest‑weight standard)
Seasons Coal Co. v. Cleveland, 10 Ohio St.3d 77 (on construing evidence in favor of verdict)
State v. Miley, 114 Ohio App.3d 738 (distinguished — held circumstantial evidence insufficient where two caregivers were only possible perpetrators)
State v. Apanovitch, 33 Ohio St.3d 19 (recognizes that circumstantial evidence can sustain serious convictions)
State v. Nicely, 39 Ohio St.3d 147 (same principle regarding circumstantial proof)
State v. Lott, 51 Ohio St.3d 160 (discussion of circumstantial evidence value)
State v. Grube, 987 N.E.2d 287 (acknowledges circumstantial evidence may be more persuasive than direct evidence)