State v. Octavio, 2016 Ohio 7661

Defendant Tyler Octavio was tried in Canton Municipal Court for theft after a jury found he and co-defendant Alec took Jared Smith’s laptop from Smith’s grandmother’s home and exchanged it for cocaine.
Co-defendant Alec admitted exchanging the laptop for drugs and testified that he and Octavio used cocaine and discussed trading the laptop for drugs; Alec did not tell Octavio the family had consented to the taking.
Octavio initially denied involvement; in a second police interview he made several statements indicating he believed the laptop was stolen or that things "seemed fishy," including "I knew, but I didn't ask."
The jury convicted Octavio of theft; the trial court sentenced him to 180 days incarceration (with most suspended), probation and costs.
On appeal Octavio argued the conviction was against the sufficiency and manifest weight of the evidence.
The Fifth District affirmed, concluding the evidence (including Octavio’s statements and the co-defendant’s testimony) permitted a rational jury to find Octavio acted knowingly to deprive the owner of the laptop.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether evidence was constitutionally sufficient for theft conviction	State: viewing evidence in light most favorable to prosecution, a rational trier of fact could find all elements beyond reasonable doubt	Octavio: insufficient evidence he knowingly obtained stolen property	Held: Sufficient — jury could find Octavio knowingly obtained and exchanged the laptop for drugs
Whether conviction was against manifest weight of the evidence	State: witness testimony, video interview, and circumstantial evidence supported verdict	Octavio: jury lost its way; conflicting testimony and his denials undermine verdict	Held: Not against manifest weight — appellate court will not substitute its view for jury absent exceptional case
Whether Octavio’s statements established knowledge	State: Octavio’s admissions and failure to inquire show he acted knowingly under R.C. 2901.22(B)	Octavio: claimed lack of knowledge/denial in first interview	Held: Statements on video demonstrated awareness or conscious avoidance of the fact laptop was stolen; supports knowing element
Whether circumstantial evidence suffices	State: circumstantial evidence has equal probative value to direct evidence	Octavio: relied on inconsistencies and alternative explanations	Held: Circumstantial evidence sufficient; jury may credit parts of testimony and reject others

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for constitutional sufficiency of the evidence)
State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (standard and review for manifest weight of the evidence)
Eastley v. Volkman, 132 Ohio St.3d 328 (presumptions and reasonable inferences in weight review)
State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (circumstantial evidence has same probative value as direct evidence)