State v. Hurston, 2019 Ohio 3618

In July 2018 Miracle Hurston was charged in Middletown Municipal Court with one count of assault (first-degree misdemeanor) for allegedly striking the owner-landlord in the face, causing her to fall and briefly lose consciousness.
The incident occurred after an exchange about insurance and verbal insults; the victim and her husband testified the attack was unprovoked and that both were struck.
Hurston testified the victim slapped and lunged at him first, and he pushed her to get away; his parents testified similarly that the victim struck or provoked him.
The bench trial occurred in October 2018; the trial court found Hurston guilty and imposed community control, a suspended jail term, and a fine.
On appeal Hurston argued (1) insufficient evidence as to the requisite mental state (knowingly) and (2) conviction was against the manifest weight of the evidence.
The court reviewed sufficiency and manifest-weight standards and considered whether self-defense justified reversal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency: Did the State prove Hurston acted "knowingly" in causing physical harm?	State: Evidence (victim/husband testimony and Hurston’s admission he pushed the victim) proved Hurston acted knowingly.	Hurston: He pushed only to repel an attack; lacked culpable mental state to support assault conviction.	Affirmed — viewing evidence in the light most favorable to the State, a rational trier of fact could find the elements, including knowledge, proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
Manifest weight: Did the evidence so heavily favor acquittal that conviction is a miscarriage of justice?	State: Credible victim and husband testimony supported conviction; bench found their accounts credible.	Hurston: Conflicting testimony (his and his parents’) showed a different version (victim provoked/struck first).	Affirmed — trial court was best positioned to judge credibility; this is not an exceptional case warranting reversal.
Self-defense (concurring analysis)	N/A at trial level.	Hurston: Force was defensive because victim slapped/lunged at him.	Concurrence: Self-defense fails — Hurston was not entitled to use the degree of force he used and had a duty to retreat; conviction stands.

No officially reported authorities with Bluebook reporter citations are provided in the opinion text for inclusion. (The opinion cites several appellate unreported/slip opinions and Ohio slip-opinion numbers, but those do not supply official reporter citations.)