State v. Miller, 2014 Ohio 261

Three‑month‑old infant K.B. was taken to a pediatrician on March 1, 2012; abnormal exam (bulging anterior fontanelle, altered pupils) led to CT scan and transfer to Rainbow Babies & Children’s Hospital.
K.B. was diagnosed with subdural hematomas of differing ages, retinal hemorrhages, brain bleeding/volume loss, and multiple rib fractures; treating physician concluded nonaccidental trauma.
Seneca County grand jury indicted Rodney A. Miller, Jr. for endangering children (R.C. 2919.22) as a felony; at trial the jury convicted him of the lesser included first‑degree misdemeanor (finding no serious physical harm).
Key evidence included: Miller’s two recorded interviews in which he admitted to multiple rough handling techniques (dropping, jerking stroller, holding head down, hanging upside down, rocking, co‑sleeping despite moving in his sleep) and his statements that some techniques may have been improper; medical testimony linking injuries to inflicted trauma.
Trial court denied defendant’s Crim.R. 29 motion; Miller appealed asserting (1) conviction was against the manifest weight of the evidence, and (2) ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to object to prosecutorial opening statement.
The Third District affirmed, holding the record supported each statutory element of R.C. 2919.22(A) (control/in loco parentis, breach of duty, creation of substantial risk, recklessness) and counsel’s conduct was a reasonable tactical choice.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether conviction under R.C. 2919.22(A) was against the manifest weight of the evidence	State: Miller admitted numerous improper child‑care techniques and evidence showed he had custody/control; medical experts linked injuries to nonaccidental trauma, supporting elements of the offense	Miller: No credible evidence he caused injuries; investigators failed to thoroughly investigate other adults; his techniques were unconventional but not causative	Court: Affirmed—weight of evidence supports each element (control, duty breach, substantial risk, recklessness); causation to injuries is not an element of R.C. 2919.22(A) for the misdemeanor conviction
Whether counsel was ineffective for not objecting to alleged mischaracterizations in prosecutor's opening statement	State: Opening statements are not evidence; tactical choice not to interrupt is reasonable	Miller: Failure to object to prosecutor’s opening exaggerated his conduct and prejudiced defense	Court: Affirmed—no deficient performance; declining to object to opening statement was a reasonable tactical decision

State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (weight‑of‑the‑evidence standard for criminal convictions)
State v. Martin, 20 Ohio App.3d 172 (illustrating Thompkins quote on manifest miscarriage of justice)
State v. DeHass, 10 Ohio St.2d 230 (deference to trier of fact on credibility and weight)
State v. McGee, 79 Ohio St.3d 193 (elements of child endangering under R.C. 2919.22(A))
State v. Kamel, 12 Ohio St.3d 306 (no need to show actual physical abuse to sustain conviction under R.C. 2919.22(A))
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (two‑prong ineffective assistance test)
State v. Bradley, 42 Ohio St.3d 136 (standards for prejudice and substantial violation of counsel's duties)