State v. Hernandez, 2022 Ohio 3011

Victim Joey Hildebrand was abducted, tied in a bathtub, beaten, stabbed, tortured (torch near genitals), drugged, placed in his SUV, and escaped; his SUV was later found burned.
Lisa Hernandez was identified by the victim by voice, appeared in cellphone photographs from the scene, and was implicated in recorded jail calls and by statements to a cellmate admitting involvement.
Co-defendant Carl (Craig) Yosick pleaded guilty and testified about the events; his testimony implicated Hernandez but contained inconsistencies.
Hernandez was indicted on multiple felonies (kidnapping, felonious assault, robbery, tampering, arson) and convicted after a jury trial; she received an aggregate sentence of 30–35.5 years.
On appeal Hernandez raised three assignments of error: (1) convictions against the manifest weight of the evidence; (2) plain error for failure to give the R.C. 2923.03(D) "grave suspicion" accomplice-witness instruction; and (3) ineffective assistance for counsel’s failure to request that instruction.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether convictions are against the manifest weight of the evidence	State: ample independent evidence (victim voice ID, photos, jail calls, cellmate testimony) supports convictions	Hernandez: identification evidence is unreliable; witnesses inconsistent or impaired	Court: convictions not against manifest weight; jury credibility determinations upheld; Assignment 1 overruled
Whether failure to give R.C. 2923.03(D) accomplice "grave suspicion" instruction was plain error	State: although instruction omitted, there was sufficient non-accomplice evidence; cross-examination and plea details were presented	Hernandez: omission deprived her of fair trial because accomplice testimony (Yosick) was important	Court: court erred in omitting the instruction but error was not plain — abundant independent evidence negated need for reversal; Assignment 2 overruled
Whether counsel was ineffective for not requesting accomplice instruction	State: choice was a tactical decision; even if deficient, no prejudice because other evidence was strong	Hernandez: failure to request instruction was deficient and prejudicial	Court: assuming deficiency, Hernandez cannot show prejudice under Strickland; no reasonable probability of acquittal; Assignment 3 overruled

State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (weight-of-the-evidence standard and reversal only for manifest miscarriage of justice)
State v. Issa, 93 Ohio St.3d 49 (appellate deference to trial-court credibility determinations)
Seasons Coal Co. v. Cleveland, 10 Ohio St.3d 77 (presumption in favor of judgment; interpret evidence to sustain verdict)
United States v. Gardner, 32 F.4th 504 (voice-identification admissibility principles)
State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (circumstantial evidence has same probative value as direct evidence)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (two-prong ineffective-assistance test)
State v. Quarterman, 140 Ohio St.3d 464 (plain-error standard explanation)
Martin v. [State], 20 Ohio App.3d 172 (quotation on reversal only when jury clearly lost its way)