State v. Good
2011 Ohio 5077
Ohio Ct. App.2011Background
- Adam Good was convicted in Wayne County Municipal Court of domestic violence for two incidents with Kally Braucher (Aug. 4, 2010 in a WalMart parking lot; Aug. 26, 2010 at Good’s home).
- Appellate courts consolidated the two cases and Good raises three assignments of error on appeal.
- Evidence included testimony from Braucher, Brannan (a sleeping witness), Meinanger, Rinner, and law enforcement, plus officer observations of injuries.
- The defense argued credibility issues and inconsistencies in Braucher’s memory; the State presented corroborating testimony and medical/injury observations.
- The court affirmed both convictions, addressing manifest-weight challenges and an ineffective-assistance claim, and rejected Good’s arguments as to sufficiency and credibility.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Manifest weight—Aug. 26, 2010 conviction | Good argues the record weighs against conviction | Braucher’s vague memory undermines credibility | Not against the manifest weight; evidence supported conviction |
| Manifest weight—Aug. 4, 2010 conviction | Good argues testimony inconsistencies undermine viability | Witnesses and police corroborate the assault | Not against the manifest weight; sufficient evidence supported conviction |
| Ineffective assistance—failure to move for Crim.R. 29 acquittal | Counsel’s failure to move waived sufficiency review | Waiver not created; sufficiency review preserved by other means | No deficient performance; no prejudice; assignment overruled |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Otten, 33 Ohio App.3d 339 (Ohio App.3d 1986) (weight-of-the-evidence standard; thirteenth juror concept)
- State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (1997) (standard for manifest weight; exceptional cases required for reversal)
- State v. Martin, 20 Ohio App.3d 172 (Ohio App. 1983) (discretion to grant a new trial; exceptional weighing of evidence)
- State v. Jones, 91 Ohio St.3d 335 (2001) (preservation of sufficiency issues despite Crim.R. 29 timing)
- State v. Carter, 64 Ohio St.3d 218 (1992) (recognition that not guilty plea preserves sufficiency challenge)