State v. Walker, Unpublished Decision (12-22-1999)
Opinion
This appeal, considered on the accelerated calendar under App.R. 11.1(E) and Loc.R. 12, is not controlling authority except as provided in S.Ct.R.Rep.Op. 2(G) (1).
The offense of assault requires the state to prove that the offender acted knowingly, not that the offender specifically intended or expected to cause injury. See R.C.
Further, after reviewing the record, we cannot conclude that the trier of fact clearly lost its way and created such a manifest miscarriage of judgment that we must reverse the conviction and order a new trial. Therefore, appellant's conviction is not against the manifest weight of the evidence. See State v. Allen (1990),
Further, a certified copy of this Judgment Entry shall constitute the mandate, which shall be sent to the trial court under App.R. 27. Costs shall be taxed under App.R. 24.
Gorman, P.J., Sundermann and Shannon, JJ.
Raymond E. Shannon, retired, from the First Appellate District, sitting by assignment.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
State v. Walker, Unpublished Decision (12-22-1999) (State v. Walker, Unpublished Decision (12-22-1999)) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.