State v. Black, 2021 Ohio 268

On March 16, 2020, Colby Black and his girlfriend argued; Black kicked a laundry-room gate that struck the victim in the face, breaking her nose and causing bruising.
Black was charged with one count of Domestic Violence under R.C. 2919.25(A) (knowingly causing physical harm to a household member).
Arraigned April 6, 2020, pleaded not guilty, released on bond; bench trial held June 10, 2020.
Trial court found Black guilty, sentenced him to 180 days incarceration, a $500 fine, and court costs.
On appeal Black raised (1) ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to advise him of his jury-trial right and cursory discovery review, and (2) that the conviction was unsupported by sufficient / was against the manifest weight of the evidence.
Key factual dispute on appeal concerned whether the victim qualified as a "household member" (cohabitation): the victim was not a spouse, but Black testified he was "staying" at the residence and later packed his things, which the trial court viewed as evidence of cohabitation.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Black received ineffective assistance for counsel’s failure to inform him of the right to a jury trial and cursory discovery review	Appellee: assignment is forfeited for failure to brief; procedural default under appellate rules	Black: counsel failed to advise of jury-trial right and did not adequately review discovery	Court: Assignment dismissed for failure to brief; notes claim may be raised in postconviction relief because counsel cannot realistically argue his own incompetence
Whether evidence was sufficient / conviction against manifest weight of the evidence	State: victim’s testimony, photos of injuries, and Black’s statements about “staying” supported elements (physical harm and household-member status)	Black: testimony conflicted about how injuries occurred and severity; no proof of cohabitation	Court: Evidence sufficient as a matter of law; trial court did not lose its way — conviction affirmed

State v. Lentz, 70 Ohio St.3d 527 (1994) (res judicata exception where same counsel at trial and appeal prevents realistic challenge to counsel’s competence)
State v. Cole, 2 Ohio St.3d 112 (1982) (recognizing that counsel cannot realistically argue his own incompetence)
State v. Sullivan, 102 N.E.3d 86 (2017) (sufficiency standard: evidence viewed in light most favorable to prosecution)
State v. Potts, 69 N.E.3d 1227 (2016) (clarifying sufficiency review language)
State v. Mendoza, 137 Ohio App.3d 336 (2000) (manifest-weight review requires weighing evidence and assessing credibility)
State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (1997) (explaining distinction between sufficiency and manifest-weight standards)