State v. Vargas, 2012 Ohio 2768

Vargas was convicted by jury of obstructing official business and acquitted of theft.
The incident began with a car accident involving Vargas’s girlfriend’s car; Vargas fled the scene and was pursued.
Police located Vargas behind a bank near a ravine with a strong odor of alcohol and ordered him to stay away from the edge.
Vargas moved toward the ravine edge, went over it, and required a lengthy rescue operation by multiple agencies.
The trial court sentenced Vargas to ten months; on appeal, the court upheld the conviction for obstructing official business and denied a Crim.R. 29 acquittal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence to convict obstructing official business	State argues evidence proved illegal act and interference.	Vargas contends no obstructing act; fleeing alone insufficient.	Sufficiency supported; conviction affirmed.
Weight of the evidence (manifest weight)	State maintains credibility supports conviction.	Vargas argues evidence weighs against conviction.	Not against the manifest weight; conviction affirmed.
Crim.R. 29 judgment of acquittal	State contends no need for acquittal; evidence suffices.	Vargas seeks acquittal due to insufficiency.	Crim.R. 29 defenses rejected; judgment preserved.

State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (1991) (sufficiency review standard; reasonable doubt standard)
State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (1997) (weight vs. sufficiency; standard for weighing evidence)
Garfield Hts. v. Simpson, 82 Ohio App.3d 286 (1992) (obstructing official business requires illegal act and interference)
State v. Wilson, 2011-Ohio-6886 (8th Dist.) (fleeing from police can support obstruction)
State v. Williams, 2004-Ohio-4476 (8th Dist.) (ignoring orders and evading police can support obstruction)
State v. Mitchell, 8th Dist. No. 95095, 2011-Ohio-1241 (2011) (sufficiency review applicable to obstruction)