State v. Flowers, 2014 Ohio 3087

Gregory Flowers was indicted on two third-degree felony counts of sexual battery under R.C. 2907.03(A)(2) and (A)(3) based on allegations by D.O., his son’s former fiancée.
At trial Flowers pleaded not guilty; the jury convicted him on count one (A)(2) — knowingly engaging in sexual conduct with a person whose ability to appraise or control conduct was substantially impaired — and acquitted him on the other count.
Nurse Denise Miller, a sexual assault nurse examiner, examined D.O., documented vaginal injuries (a laceration and dye uptake/abrasion), and testified about what such injuries are consistent with.
Flowers objected when Miller testified that injuries like D.O.’s are caused by sexual assault, arguing that this invaded the jury’s province on the ultimate issue.
The jury also heard victim testimony about drinking several shots that left her dizzy and unable to stand, and officer testimony that occupants were intoxicated; Flowers was sentenced to 24 months.
Flowers appealed, raising (1) improper expert testimony on the ultimate issue, (2) manifest-weight challenge to the finding Flowers knew D.O. was substantially impaired, and (3) a bare sufficiency claim.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether expert testimony improperly answered the ultimate issue (causation of injuries / sexual assault)	State: Miller’s expertise helped explain medical findings and was admissible under Evid.R. 704	Flowers: Miller’s statement that such injuries are caused by sexual assault improperly told the jury the ultimate issue	Overruled — court found testimony could be read as describing consistency with injuries the nurse had seen and learned were caused by assault, not an unequivocal factual finding; admission not an abuse of discretion
Whether conviction was against manifest weight regarding Flowers’ knowledge that D.O. was substantially impaired	State: victim’s drinking, observed intoxication, Flowers supplied first shot and assisted her to bed supported inference he knew she was impaired	Flowers: victim’s testimony about only a few spaced shots and prior drinking, plus nurse’s lack of note about drinking, undercut proof of substantial impairment or knowledge	Overruled — court defers to jury credibility findings; evidence supported reasonable inference Flowers knew she was impaired
Whether evidence was legally sufficient to support conviction	State: trial evidence, if believed, proved elements beyond a reasonable doubt	Flowers: generally asserted insufficiency but provided no developed argument on appeal	Overruled — appellant failed to develop argument; court declined to perform detailed sufficiency analysis

State v. Sage, 31 Ohio St.3d 173 (expert opinion on ultimate issue admissible when beyond jurors’ understanding)
Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (abuse of discretion standard)
State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (sufficiency standard — view evidence in prosecution’s favor)
State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (distinguishing sufficiency and manifest weight; appellate role as thirteenth juror for weight review)
State v. Otten, 33 Ohio App.3d 339 (manifest-weight standard and miscarriage of justice test)