State v. Smith, 2017 Ohio 8657

Appellant Daryl R. Smith was arrested after a vehicle crash and found in nearby woods; officers recovered two-and-one-half Suboxone strips from his wallet.
Smith was charged with possession of a Schedule III controlled substance (Suboxone), resisting arrest, obstruction of justice, and menacing; he was later convicted of possession, resisting arrest, and obstruction (menacing acquitted).
At trial Smith presented a pharmacy receipt and testified he had a valid prescription and had taken Suboxone as prescribed for 2½ years; he did not produce an actual signed prescription document.
The trial court found the receipt was not a lawful prescription under R.C. 2925.01(JJ) and convicted Smith of possession, concluding Smith failed to meet his burden to prove the affirmative defense that the drug was lawfully prescribed.
On appeal Smith argued the conviction was against the manifest weight of the evidence because he proved he had a prescription; the State argued Smith failed to prove all statutory elements of a “lawful prescription” and the defense is within the defendant’s peculiar knowledge.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Smith's conviction for possession of Suboxone is against the manifest weight of the evidence because he produced a pharmacy receipt and testified to a prescription	The State: Smith did not prove the statutory elements of a "lawful prescription" (legitimate medical purpose; issued by a licensed prescriber; not forged/altered; not obtained by deception or theft) and Smith may not expand the trial record on appeal	Smith: Receipt plus testimony showed he obtained the Suboxone by valid prescription; packaging codes do not contradict that and the State offered no contrary evidence	Affirmed. The court held Smith failed to meet his burden to prove the affirmative defense by a preponderance; the receipt is not a prescription and additional record evidence cannot be raised on appeal; verdict not against manifest weight.

State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (1997) (manifest-weight standard and appellate review authority)
State v. Hunter, 131 Ohio St.3d 67 (2011) (discussion of manifest-weight review)
State v. Kirkland, 140 Ohio St.3d 73 (2014) (deference to factfinder on weight and credibility)
Morgan v. Eads, 104 Ohio St.3d 142 (2004) (appellate review limited to trial record)
State v. Ishmail, 54 Ohio St.2d 402 (1978) (court cannot add matter to the record on appeal)
State v. Dixon, 101 Ohio St.3d 328 (2004) (enforcing limits on appellate consideration of new evidence)
State v. Thomas, 97 Ohio St.3d 309 (2002) (same principle restricting appellate supplementation of the record)