State v. Cookingham
2017 Ohio 8362
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Defendant Thomas D. Cookingham was charged with two counts of aggravated menacing, resisting arrest, obstructing official business, disorderly conduct, and possession of marijuana after deputies responded to a disturbance at his home on March 5, 2016.
- Deputies Wolff and Johns testified Cookingham was agitated, cursed, assumed a threatening stance, hid his hands, and ignored repeated orders to show his hands.
- Officers attempted to arrest him; they said he physically resisted, flailed, and brushed against an officer’s duty weapon, requiring him to be taken to the ground.
- During an incident‑to‑arrest search, officers found containers with burnt marijuana cigarettes and a loose substance identified by them as marijuana; they testified Cookingham blew some of the contents off the cruiser onto gravel, scattering it.
- Both deputies testified Cookingham threatened to kill and rape them and their families in graphic detail; they stated they were fearful. Johns’ police report omitted some of the detailed statements he later testified to at trial.
- Following a bench trial, the court found Cookingham guilty on all counts and imposed consecutive jail terms totaling 17 months. Cookingham appealed, raising sufficiency/manifest‑weight and ineffective‑assistance claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Cookingham) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency/manifest weight of evidence for all convictions | Officers’ testimony, if believed, proves elements of aggravated menacing, resisting arrest, obstruction, disorderly conduct, and marijuana possession | Officer testimony was unreliable/false; absence of audio/video and incomplete report undermines proof | Convictions are supported; weight and sufficiency favor the State |
| Aggravated menacing (threats to officers/families) | Deputies heard graphic threats causing fear that defendant would commit serious harm | Threats were fabricated; defendant was intoxicated and lacked requisite mental state | Threats proved beyond reasonable doubt; voluntary intoxication does not negate mens rea under Ohio law |
| Obstructing official business / marijuana evidence | Defendant scattered suspected marijuana, impeding officers’ investigation | Substance was not lab‑confirmed; much evidence lost when scattered | Interference with officers’ duties proved; identity confirmation unnecessary to establish obstruction |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel (bench trial, no Crim.R.29 motion, no defense witnesses) | Trial counsel’s strategic choices were reasonable; record lacks proof counsel failed to advise; omission of motions/witnesses did not prejudice outcome | Counsel failed to request jury, failed to move for acquittal, and omitted witnesses, denying effective assistance | No ineffective assistance: tactical decisions are reasonable and defendant failed to demonstrate prejudice |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (establishes sufficiency standard following Jackson v. Virginia)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (constitutionally required standard for conviction: evidence sufficient for any rational trier of fact)
- State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (distinguishes sufficiency from manifest weight review)
- State v. Wilson, 113 Ohio St.3d 382 (discusses manifest‑weight inquiry and credibility assessment)
- State v. DeHass, 10 Ohio St.2d 230 (trial court is best positioned to judge witness credibility)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (two‑part ineffective‑assistance standard)
- State v. Madrigal, 87 Ohio St.3d 378 (applies Strickland in Ohio criminal appeals)