State v. Cunningham, 2017 Ohio 4363

Phillip Cunningham was indicted for second-degree felony endangering children (R.C. 2919.22(B)(1)) and murder (R.C. 2903.02(B)) after his two-month-old daughter suffered fatal brain injuries.
Emergency responders found the infant not breathing; she was transported to Cincinnati Children’s Hospital and died two days later from traumatic brain injury and intracranial hemorrhaging.
Medical testimony: injuries were non-accidental, required substantial force, were consistent with severe acceleration/deceleration (shaking), and not consistent with a simple fall; one skull fracture may have predated the fatal injury.
Cunningham initially denied knowledge, then gave multiple statements: admitted dropping the infant, later admitted shaking her to quiet her — demonstrated shaking and said he shook her for ~90 seconds with significant force.
A jury convicted Cunningham of both counts; the trial court merged counts and sentenced him to 15 years-to-life on murder. On appeal, Cunningham raised sufficiency/weight, jury-instruction error, ineffective assistance, and a sentencing error (court costs).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency/manifest weight of evidence for endangering children and murder	State: admissions + medical expert opinion linking shaking to fatal injuries suffice	Cunningham: evidence insufficient to tie his conduct to injuries and to show recklessness	Court: Overruled — convictions supported by manifest weight; admissions + experts show reckless abuse causing serious harm and death
Correct culpable mental-state instruction ("risk" vs "substantial risk")	State: statutory definition of "risk" may be used; legislature separated modifiers from "risk"	Cunningham: jury should have been instructed on "substantial risk" (higher threshold); use altered definition prejudiced him	Court: No plain error; evidence so strong that different wording would not have clearly changed outcome
Ineffective assistance for counsel requesting "risk" definition	N/A	Cunningham: counsel erred in requesting lesser "risk" definition, prejudicing defense	Court: Overruled — no prejudice shown given sufficiency of evidence and no plain error on instruction
Imposition of court costs at sentencing	State: concedes trial court failed to impose costs in open court	Cunningham: court order imposed costs though not announced at sentencing, depriving opportunity to claim indigency	Court: Sustained — reversed and remanded for limited resentencing on court costs in accordance with State v. Joseph

State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (Ohio 1991) (standard for sufficiency of evidence in criminal convictions)
State v. Adams, 62 Ohio St.2d 151 (Ohio 1980) (trial court must instruct jury on elements and culpable mental state)
State v. Campbell, 69 Ohio St.3d 38 (Ohio 1994) (plain-error review of allegedly incorrect jury instructions)
State v. Joseph, 125 Ohio St.3d 76 (Ohio 2010) (trial court must impose court costs in open court; remedy when not imposed)
State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (Ohio 1997) (distinguishing sufficiency and manifest weight standards)