State v. Brauer
2013 Ohio 3319
Ohio Ct. App.2013Background
- David P. Brauer II and Cynthia Reis were living together at a motel; room rented in Reis's name and paid by Brauer.
- During an August 7, 2012 altercation, Reis threw soda in Brauer's face; Brauer spat back, grabbed the motel phone receiver, swung it with both hands and struck Reis in the head.
- Reis called 9-1-1 from the bathroom; officers responded and Brauer was later arrested.
- Brauer was indicted for domestic violence (R.C. 2919.25(A)); the state presented Reis and two officers at trial; Brauer did not testify.
- Jury convicted Brauer; he appealed arguing insufficient evidence, manifest weight error, and that the trial court erred in denying his Crim.R. 29 motion for acquittal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Reis was a "family or household member" under R.C. 2919.25 | State: Reis and Brauer cohabited and were in a girlfriend-boyfriend relationship with shared responsibilities and consortium | Brauer: No proof of conjugal relations; therefore no cohabitation and not a protected family/household member | Court: Conjugal relations not required; testimony of girlfriend status, mutual affection, and shared living supports cohabitation and family/household status |
| Whether the state proved Brauer "knowingly" caused physical harm | State: Circumstances (Brauer swinging phone at Reis who was backing away) support an inference he was aware his conduct would probably cause harm | Brauer: Reis testified she did not know whether the blow was accidental or intentional, so mens rea not proven | Court: "Knowingly" may be inferred from surrounding circumstances; jury reasonably found Brauer was aware his conduct would probably cause harm |
| Whether the conviction is supported by sufficient evidence | State: Evidence at trial (victim testimony, officer statements) supports conviction | Brauer: Evidence insufficient; trial court should have granted Crim.R. 29 acquittal | Court: Conviction supported by sufficient evidence; denial of Crim.R. 29 proper |
| Whether the conviction is against the manifest weight of the evidence | State: Witness credibility and inferences support verdict | Brauer: Verdict is against the manifest weight given inconsistencies | Court: Viewing the whole record, jury did not lose its way; conviction not against manifest weight |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Williams, 79 Ohio St.3d 459 (Ohio 1997) (defines cohabitation elements and lists factors for consortium and shared responsibilities)
- State v. Logan, 60 Ohio St.2d 126 (Ohio 1979) (mental state may be inferred from surrounding circumstances)
- State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (Ohio 1997) (standard for granting new trial on manifest-weight grounds)
- State v. Lang, 129 Ohio St.3d 512 (Ohio 2011) (outlines appellate review for manifest-weight claims)