State v. Moore, 112 N.E.3d 76

Victim and Cecil Moore met at a restaurant, exchanged contacts, and later visited a bar; an earlier awkward encounter occurred at the bar.
On August 18–19, 2015, Moore visited the victim’s apartment; a dispute arose when victim refused unprotected intercourse because Moore had no condom.
Victim testified Moore became verbally hostile, refused to leave, and she felt afraid because he had a firearm; she performed oral sex to placate him and later said Moore digitally penetrated and had intercourse with her without consent.
Moore denied any sexual contact, testified the victim was the aggressor, left after a short argument, and asserted his purpose for visiting was networking for employment.
Medical exam showed abrasions in the vaginal vestibule but no male DNA or semen was found; the jury acquitted Moore of rape and kidnapping but convicted him of sexual battery (for coerced fellatio).
On appeal the court reviewed sufficiency and manifest-weight challenges, affirmed sufficiency, but reversed the conviction as against the manifest weight of the evidence and remanded for further proceedings.

Issue	State's Argument	Moore's Argument	Held
Was evidence sufficient to prove Moore knowingly coerced sexual conduct (sexual battery)?	Victim’s testimony that Moore’s hostility, refusal to leave, and the visible firearm created coercion sufficient for a jury to find Moore knowingly coerced her to submit.	No direct request, threat, or pressure for oral sex; state failed to prove Moore knowingly coerced the specific act.	Sufficient: a reasonable juror could find Moore knowingly coerced the victim based on the overall conduct if they believed her.
Was the conviction against the manifest weight of the evidence?	The jury believed the victim’s account; testimony and SANE notes supported coercion theory.	Victim’s testimony was inconsistent, differed from medical-record narrative, and no DNA linked Moore to the assault; conviction is against manifest weight.	Reversed: the appellate court found the evidence conflicted and the case was an exceptional one where the evidence weighed heavily against conviction.

State v. Murphy, 91 Ohio St.3d 516 (Ohio 2001) (standard for appellate sufficiency review)
State v. Walker, 150 Ohio St.3d 409 (Ohio 2016) (quoting Jenks standard for sufficiency review)
State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (Ohio 1991) (articulating the test for sufficiency of the evidence)
State v. Woods, 48 Ohio St.2d 127 (Ohio 1976) (defining coercion for sexual-offense context)
State v. Wilkins, 64 Ohio St.2d (Ohio) (coercion is broader than force in sexual offenses)
State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (Ohio 1997) (manifest-weight standard; appellate court as "thirteenth juror")
State v. Martin, 20 Ohio App.3d 172 (Ohio App. 1983) (framework for manifest-weight review)