State v. Cooper, 2020 Ohio 3559

Defendant Duone D. Cooper was convicted after a bench trial of fourth-degree misdemeanor domestic violence under R.C. 2919.25(C) and appealed, arguing insufficiency and manifest-weight errors.
Victim Michelle, the mother of one of Cooper’s children and a former cohabitant, was at home with her current boyfriend when Cooper arrived outside, yelling and banging on doors and windows.
Michelle was on the phone with Cooper while hearing him outside; she called 911, testified she was fearful, and said Cooper stuck his head through an open window, circled the house, and yelled for them to “come get this” and that he had “that thing” in his car (which she took to mean a weapon).
Michelle testified Cooper had previously broken into her home and that this was not the first incident; Cooper left before police arrived but called again while officers were present and was heard yelling on the phone.
Officer Christina Delfina corroborated Michelle’s description of intense yelling when she spoke to Cooper on Michelle’s phone.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the evidence was sufficient to prove Cooper knowingly, by threat of force, caused a family/household member to believe he would cause imminent physical harm (R.C. 2919.25(C))	State: Michelle’s testimony about Cooper’s yelling, banging, physical intrusion, statements about a weapon, and prior break-ins made her fear imminent harm; officer corroborated yelling.	Cooper: Conduct was directed at Michelle’s boyfriend (Cody), not Michelle; no explicit verbal threats; no proof of weapon; threats were mere innuendo.	Affirmed: A reasonable factfinder could infer threats from conduct and statements; Michelle’s fear was reasonable and mens rea satisfied.
Whether the verdict was against the manifest weight of the evidence	State: The totality of credible evidence supports conviction; trier of fact properly credited victim and officer.	Cooper: Inconsistent facts (e.g., windows open), evidence was innuendo, and conviction rests on speculation.	Affirmed: Appellate court defers to factfinder’s credibility determinations and finds no miscarriage of justice.

State v. Smith, 80 Ohio St.3d 89, 684 N.E.2d 668 (1997) (explains sufficiency-of-evidence standard)
State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380, 678 N.E.2d 541 (1997) (distinguishes sufficiency and manifest-weight review and describes appellate role as thirteenth juror)
State v. Goff, 82 Ohio St.3d 123, 694 N.E.2d 916 (1998) (evaluating evidence and inferences in sufficiency review)
Hamilton v. Cameron, 121 Ohio App.3d 445, 700 N.E.2d 336 (12th Dist. 1997) (victim’s state of mind may be proven by inference from conduct and statements)
State v. Collie, 108 Ohio App.3d 580, 671 N.E.2d 338 (1st Dist. 1996) (prior violent acts may be admitted to show victim’s belief)
State v. Martin, 20 Ohio App.3d 172, 485 N.E.2d 717 (1983) (describes exceptional standard for overturning verdict as against the manifest weight of the evidence)