State v. Rodich, 2014 Ohio 4399

Defendant-appellant Michael G. Rodich was charged with having physical control of a motor vehicle while under the influence on September 6, 2013.
Bench trial held November 20, 2013; Trooper Matt Foster testified to observations of Rodich and the vehicle.
The vehicle initially located 13 miles from the later plaza location with a female occupant identified by the trooper.
Rodich was found in the passenger seat with the ignition key, exhibiting strong odor of alcohol and red, glassy eyes, and he refused sobriety testing.
The state argued circumstantial evidence showed Rodich had moved the vehicle into physical control; the court denied Crim.R. 29 motions and convicted Rodich.
On appeal, Rodich contends the evidence was legally insufficient and against the manifest weight of the evidence; the appellate court affirms.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the evidence proves physical control beyond a reasonable doubt	Rodich argues the state failed to prove he was in physical control	Rodich asserts lack of driver-seat position and alternative explanations for vehicle movement	Sufficient evidence; not against the weight of the evidence
Whether circumstantial evidence supported conviction	State relies on circumstantial facts (distance, keys, location)	Defense questions reliance on circumstantial inference	Conviction supported by circumstantial evidence that Rodich moved vehicle into position of control

State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (1997) (sufficiency and weight distinctions; standard of review for conviction)
State v. Williams, 74 Ohio St.3d 569 (1996) (legal standard for sufficiency of evidence; viewing evidence in light favor of prosecution)
State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (1991) (outline of sufficiency review; standard for conviction beyond reasonable doubt)
Village of Waterville v. Lombardo, 2004-Ohio-475 (6th Dist. Lucas) (circumstantial evidence can establish physical control when defendant near vehicle and circumstances support inference)