State v. Slaughter, 2013 Ohio 1824

Slaughter convicted of sexual battery under R.C. 2907.03(A)(2) after a bench trial.
Victim W.Y. is 21, with cerebral palsy and an IQ of 62 (mental impairment).
Incident occurred at Slaughter’s apartment while W.Y. sought help completing a rental application; Slaughter admitted the sexual activity.
Key issues: whether W.Y. was substantially impaired and whether Slaughter knew of that impairment.
Trial court found Slaughter knew of W.Y.’s substantial impairment and sentenced him to 2 years in prison and designated him a Tier III sex offender.
Slaughter appeals on three assignments: sufficiency of the evidence, manifest weight of the evidence, and ineffective assistance of counsel.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was there legally sufficient evidence of substantial impairment under R.C. 2907.03(A)(2)?	Slaughter argues Hankey’s tests focused on education, not impairment of consent.	Slaughter contends the evidence failed to prove substantial impairment.	No; evidence, including W.Y.’s I.Q., adaptive behavior, and witness testimony, supports substantial impairment.
Was Slaughter’s conviction against the manifest weight of the evidence?	Sufficiency supports conviction; weight should be upheld.	The evidence failed to prove substantial impairment beyond a reasonable doubt.	No; conviction not against the weight of the evidence.
Was there ineffective assistance of counsel?	Counsel failed to suppress statements, challenge Hankey, and seek an expert.	No deficient performance or prejudice shown.	No; no deficient performance established and no prejudice demonstrated.

State v. Zeh, 31 Ohio St.3d 99 (Ohio 1987) (defines substantial impairment to require present reduction in ability to appraise or control conduct)
State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (Ohio 1991) (Sufficiency standard; rational trier of fact can convict beyond reasonable doubt)
State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (Ohio 1997) (weight-of-the-evidence standard; defer to fact-finder unless clearly against weight)