State v. Thompson, 2017 Ohio 8375

Tyon Thompson was tried by jury in Franklin County Municipal Court for criminal mischief after removing and damaging a surveillance camera in a shared office; jury acquitted him on related damaging and disorderly-conduct counts but convicted on R.C. 2909.07(A)(1).
Camera had been installed by co-tenant/landlord Buffie Patterson in a common area two days earlier; dispute arose over whether Patterson could lawfully place the camera.
Witnesses (Patterson and eyewitness Jenifer Rutherford) testified Thompson stepped on his couch, pulled the common-area camera from the ceiling, threw it into Patterson’s private office, and it shattered; officer observed camera in pieces at the scene.
Thompson testified he reoriented the camera toward the wall for privacy, removed it without initially breaking it, and then tossed it back when Patterson refused to accept it; he claimed a belief in a right to remove intrusive cameras (self-help / mistake of fact).
Trial evidence included the lease, vendor invoice for camera installation, and video footage showing the camera ceasing recording and parts on Patterson’s office floor; court instructed jury that lease could be considered only if it expressly prohibited Patterson’s camera placement.
The municipal court fined Thompson $250 plus costs; Thompson appealed asserting (1) insufficient evidence and (2) conviction against the manifest weight of the evidence (arguing mistake of fact and privilege/self-help).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether evidence was legally sufficient to support conviction for criminal mischief (knowingly damaged property of another without privilege)	State argued testimony, video, and exhibits established Thompson knowingly removed and damaged Patterson’s camera and lacked privilege to do so	Thompson argued he reasonably believed he had a right under the lease to remove/abate the intrusive camera (mistake of fact) or that self-help/nuisance abatement privileged his conduct	Court held evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to prosecution, was sufficient to prove elements including mens rea; overruled insufficiency claim
Whether conviction was against manifest weight based on claimed mistake of fact or privilege (self-help)	State argued witness credibility and physical/video evidence supported Patterson’s version and refuted privileged/self-help justification	Thompson argued his subjective belief in a right to remove the camera negated the knowing mental state or justified self-help abatement	Court held weight of evidence supported conviction; determined Thompson’s claim was effectively a mistake of law (not a factual mistake) and mistake of law is not a defense; self-help privilege not recognized to negate criminal mischief here; affirmed conviction

State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (legal standards for sufficiency and manifest-weight review)
State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
Tibbs v. Florida, 457 U.S. 31 (effect of reversal for insufficient evidence)
State v. Yarbrough, 95 Ohio St.3d 227 (appellate courts do not reassess witness credibility on sufficiency review)
State v. Hancock, 108 Ohio St.3d 57 (affirmative defenses and sufficiency review)
State v. Teamer, 82 Ohio St.3d 490 (mens rea determined from attendant facts and circumstances)
State v. Pinkney, 36 Ohio St.3d 190 (mistake of law is not a defense in Ohio)
State v. Martin, 20 Ohio App.3d 172 (manifest-weight reversal reserved for exceptional cases)
State v. Snowden, 7 Ohio App.3d 358 (discussion of mistake of fact negating mens rea)