State v. Swaney, 2022 Ohio 3578

On April 5, 2021, Sarah Swaney, driving a landscaping truck with a trailer, passed a stopped car on the right shoulder and the trailer struck pedestrian Russell Morgan, who later died.
Swaney did not stop at the scene; security-camera video showed her arriving at a job site shortly after the collision and immediately examining the damaged area of the trailer.
A broken piece of plywood from the trailer tested positive for Morgan’s blood; police observed that a yellow beacon had been removed from the truck and a mechanic later found the truck’s brakes inoperable.
Swaney told police she had brake problems, admitted driving with a suspended license, gave inconsistent statements about seeing Morgan on the ground, and at one point conceded to an officer, “You’re right,” when confronted about examining the trailer.
At trial Swaney denied knowledge of hitting anyone and disputed that her brakes were defective; the jury convicted her of vehicular homicide (R.C. 2903.06) and failing to stop after an accident (R.C. 4549.02).
The court sentenced Swaney to consecutive prison terms (18 months + 36 months) and imposed an eight-year license suspension; she appealed, arguing the convictions were against the manifest weight of the evidence and that the consecutive-sentence findings were unsupported.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether convictions were against the manifest weight of the evidence	Convictions supported by evidence of defective brakes, video showing post‑collision examination, bloody plywood, Swaney’s admissions and inconsistent statements	Swaney argued she believed passing on the right was legal, denied feeling or knowing she struck anyone, and disputed brake defects; eyewitness testified there was clearance and called it a “freak accident”	Court held weight of evidence supported both convictions: jury reasonably found criminal negligence (defective brakes, passing a stopped car) and knowledge of the collision for hit‑and‑run charge
Whether consecutive sentences were supported under R.C. 2929.14(C)(4)	Consecutive terms necessary to protect public and punish; offenses were part of a course of conduct and the combined harm was serious/unusual	Swaney relied on lack of prior record and argued failure to stop caused no independent (physical) harm so the statutory finding was unsupported and sentences disproportionate	Court held trial court made required findings; record did not clearly and convincingly fail to support consecutive sentences (societal harm from fleeing and attempt to conceal damage justified consecutive terms)

State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (1997) (standard for reversing a conviction as against the manifest weight of the evidence)
State v. Martin, 20 Ohio App.3d 172 (1983) (weight-of-the-evidence reversal reserved for the exceptional case)
State v. Withrow, 64 N.E.3d 553 (2016) (appellate review standard for trial court findings supporting consecutive sentences)