State v. Fips (Slip Opinion), 2020 Ohio 1449

In 2016 Sharon D. Fips was charged with assaulting a peace officer (R.C. 2903.13(A), (C)(5)) and was convicted after a bench trial.
Fips appealed to the Eighth District asserting her conviction was against the manifest weight of the evidence.
The Eighth District agreed the conviction was against the manifest weight but instead of ordering a new trial it reduced the conviction to the lesser included offense of disorderly conduct (R.C. 2917.11(A)(1)).
A panel dissent (Judge Stewart) noted longstanding Ohio precedent that a manifest-weight reversal requires a new trial, not modification.
The full appellate court split evenly on whether modification or a new trial is the proper remedy; the State appealed to the Ohio Supreme Court.
The Ohio Supreme Court held that when a reviewing court finds a conviction is against the manifest weight of the evidence, the appropriate remedy is a new trial, reversed the Eighth District, and remanded for a new trial.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether a reviewing court may reduce a criminal conviction to a lesser included offense when it finds the conviction is against the manifest weight of the evidence	The State: established Ohio precedent requires ordering a new trial, not modifying the conviction	Fips: conviction was against the manifest weight and the appellate court may modify to a lesser included offense (as the Eighth Dist. did)	The Court: a new trial is the sole appropriate remedy when a conviction is against the manifest weight of the evidence; modification is not permitted

State v. Robinson, 162 Ohio St. 486, 124 N.E.2d 148 (1955) (holding an appellate court must order a new trial when a conviction is against the weight of the evidence)
State v. Geghan, 166 Ohio St. 188, 140 N.E.2d 790 (1957) (reiterating that the court of appeals must remand for a new trial on weight reversal)
State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380, 678 N.E.2d 541 (1997) (quoting that a weight-based reversal affords the defendant a second opportunity to seek a favorable judgment)
Eastley v. Volkman, 132 Ohio St.3d 328, 972 N.E.2d 517 (2012) (stating that a court of appeals should remand for a new trial when a verdict is against the weight of the evidence)
Tibbs v. Florida, 457 U.S. 31 (1982) (explaining the effect of a reversal based on the weight of the evidence)
Smith v. Klem, 6 Ohio St.3d 16, 450 N.E.2d 1171 (1983) (reminding lower courts of their duty to follow Supreme Court precedent)
Merrick v. Ditzler, 91 Ohio St. 256, 110 N.E. 493 (1915) (early statement on the binding nature of higher-court precedent)