State v. Young, 2012 Ohio 2352

In the early morning hours of July 29, 2010, an armed man forced two women and a child to search the home for money and drugs attributed to the occupants.
Lorenzana and Mclemore provided descriptions of the gunman and the cross tattoo; Mclemore described height/weight; Lorenzana later identified a Facebook photo of Young as the gunman.
Young was arrested and charged by grand jury with two counts each of kidnapping, aggravated robbery, and aggravated burglary, plus repeat violent offender specifications; he waived a jury trial to a bench trial.
The trial court acquitted one aggravated burglary count but found Young guilty on the remaining counts and specifications, and sentenced him to six years in prison.
Young challenged the convictions as being against the manifest weight of the evidence, arguing inconsistencies in victims’ testimony and faulty identifications.
The appellate court affirmed, holding the trial court did not lose its way in weighing the witnesses and resolving conflicts, and found the weight argument unpersuasive.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Are Young's convictions against the manifest weight of the evidence?	Young argues weight weighs against conviction.	Young contends inconsistent testimony undermines credibility.	No; convictions not against the manifest weight.

State v. Otten, 33 Ohio App.3d 339 (9th Dist.1986) (thirteenth juror standard; weigh credibility on appeal)
State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (1997) (weight of the evidence; appellate role)
State v. Martin, 20 Ohio App.3d 172 (1st Dist.1983) (exceptional case for new trial when weight clearly miscarried)
State v. Crowell, 9th Dist. No. 10CA0005, 2010-Ohio-6245 (2010) (demeanor credibility; resolving conflicts)
State v. Singfield, 9th Dist. No. 24576, 2009-Ohio-5945 (2009) (weapon focus; stress-related identification issues)