State v. Curtin
2020 Ohio 4189
Ohio Ct. App.2020Background
- On July 28, 2019, Curtin drove a vehicle into a building, fled on foot, and was later found shirtless, shoeless, and bleeding from a head wound.
- Officers ordered him to stop; Curtin rolled over and placed his hands behind his back when ordered and was handcuffed.
- Patrolman Martin used a pain-compliance technique while handcuffing; Curtin then fidgeted, complained about cuff tightness, stiffened his legs while being escorted, bashed his head on a patrol-car hood, and attempted to headbutt an officer.
- EMS declined treatment after Curtin refused ambulance transport; officers adjusted the cuffs, Curtin calmed, and he was transported to jail.
- Curtin was charged with resisting arrest under R.C. 2921.33(A), tried by jury, convicted, and sentenced to 60 days (30 suspended) plus probation and conditions.
- On appeal Curtin argued the evidence was insufficient and the verdict against the manifest weight of the evidence because his alleged resistance occurred after he was already arrested (i.e., after handcuffing).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether post-handcuff conduct can constitute resisting arrest | State: Resistance during the ongoing arrest process supports conviction | Curtin: Arrest was complete upon handcuffing, so later conduct cannot be resisting arrest | Court: Arrest is a process; resistance while securing/booking can support conviction |
| Whether arrest was lawful (probable cause) | State: Witness ID, video of crash, and Curtin’s bloodied state gave probable cause to arrest for leaving the scene | Curtin: Challenged sufficiency/weight of evidence supporting lawful arrest | Court: Evidence supported probable cause for leaving the scene, so arrest was lawful |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (sets manifest-weight standard)
- Tibbs v. Florida, 457 U.S. 31 (appellate court as thirteenth juror on weight review)
- State v. Smith, 80 Ohio St.3d 89 (sufficiency review standard)
- State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
- State v. Barker, 53 Ohio St.2d 135 (elements of an arrest defined)
- State v. Bay, 130 Ohio App.3d 772 (arrest is a process; resistance while securing defendant can be resisting arrest)
- Warren v. Patrone, 75 Ohio App.3d 595 (probable-cause test for lawful arrest)
- State v. Cross, 58 Ohio St.2d 482 (distinguished on timing of arrest vs. resisting)
- State v. Martin, 20 Ohio App.3d 172 (discusses miscarriage-of-justice/weight review)