State v. Smith, 2014 Ohio 94

Appellant Carlos L. Smith was convicted by a Franklin County jury of burglary under R.C. 2911.12(A)(3) for trespass with intent to commit theft at 988 East 18th Avenue, while another burglary count for 990 East 18th Avenue was acquitted.
Police found appellant inside Mathews' apartment after responding to reports of a burglary; bolt cutters and other items were recovered near the scene.
Appellant admitted to lying to the officer about living at the residence and had prior convictions for robbery, receiving stolen property, and a drug offense.
The State presented evidence that the apartment door was broken into, bolts and a grate were removed, and copper wires were missing from the stove, suggesting entry with purpose to commit theft.
Appellant challenged the conviction on three grounds: plain error in an instruction on criminal damaging, sufficiency of the evidence, and weight of the evidence.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court committed plain error in the criminal damaging instruction	Smith	Smith argues the word 'knowingly' was omitted	Instruction omission was harmless; burglary verdict unaffected
Whether the evidence is legally sufficient to prove burglary beyond a reasonable doubt	State	Smith contends lack of proof of 'purpose to commit' a crime	Sufficient evidence supported trespass with intent to commit theft; burglary affirmed
Whether the conviction is against the manifest weight of the evidence	State	Smith claims credibility issues warrant reversal	Evidence weighing supports the jury’s credibility assessment; not against the weight of the evidence

State v. Hubbard, 2013-Ohio-2735 (10th Dist. 2013) (plain error standard; review for obvious defect only to prevent miscarriage of justice)
State v. Long, 53 Ohio St.2d 91 (Ohio 1978) (plain error review framework: error, plainness, and potential miscarriage)
State v. Gardner, 2008-Ohio-2787 (Ohio 2008) (plain error harmless if outcome would not differ)
State v. Brooks, 101 Ohio App.3d 260 (2d Dist. 1995) (burglary requires trespass with purpose to commit theft; not necessary to prove theft inside)
State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (Ohio 1997) (standard for sufficiency of the evidence (beyond reasonable doubt))
State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (Ohio 1991) (a sufficiency review uses the light most favorable to the state)
State v. Wilson, 113 Ohio St.3d 382 (Ohio 2007) (manifest weight framework and credibility assessment)
State v. Williams, 99 Ohio St.3d 493 (Ohio 2003) (weighing evidence and credibility of witnesses)
State v. Brown, 10th Dist. No. 10AP-1204 (2011-Ohio-4766) (theft-related proof supported burglary conviction)