State v. Spencer, 2019 Ohio 2165

Appellant David L. Spencer (35) was indicted for one count of unlawful sexual conduct with a minor (R.C. 2907.04(A)) arising from events at Kings Island on June 3, 2017; victim E.B. was 15.
E.B. met Spencer at the park in May 2017, connected on Facebook, and later arranged to meet him at Kings Island on June 3; surveillance and pass-scan records corroborated their movements and entry times.
At the park Spencer kissed E.B., made age-related comments (e.g., “15 will get you 15”), and later in the wave pool carried her into deep water and, according to E.B., inserted "an inch or two" of his finger into her vagina over/around her swimsuit.
E.B. disclosed the incident to her aunt the next day after other misconduct by E.B. was discovered; law enforcement interviewed Spencer and played his recorded statement at trial.
A jury convicted Spencer, finding he was ten or more years older than the victim; he was sentenced to 48 months and classified as a Tier II sex offender.

Issue	State's Argument	Spencer's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence that sexual conduct (penetration) occurred	E.B.'s testimony that Spencer inserted a finger into her vagina was sufficient alone to prove penetration	E.B. never saw or testified that Spencer's hand was under her clothing, so penetration not proved	The court held E.B.'s testimony alone was sufficient to establish penetration and the element was proven
Sufficiency of evidence that Spencer knew or was reckless as to E.B.'s age	Testimony showed Spencer participated in age discussion in May and made age-specific comment on June 3, supporting knowledge or recklessness	Spencer contended there was insufficient evidence he knew E.B. was 15 or was reckless about her age	The court held the evidence supported that Spencer knew or was reckless regarding E.B.'s age
Manifest weight of the evidence / credibility of the victim	State relied on E.B.'s testimony, corroborating surveillance, pass records, and Spencer's recorded statement	Spencer attacked E.B.'s credibility based on inconsistencies and motives to lie	The court found the jury reasonably credited E.B.; conviction was not against the manifest weight of the evidence

State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (legal sufficiency and manifest-weight standards)
State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
State v. Blankenburg, 197 Ohio App.3d 201 (12th Dist.) (deference to jury on witness credibility)