State v. Bentley

218 N.E.3d 989

STATE of Ohio, City of Painesville, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.Brian E. BENTLEY, Defendant-Appellant.

CASE NOS. 2022-L-076

2022-L-080

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eleventh District, Lake County.

May 30, 2023

Joseph Hada, Madison Township Prosecutor, 1392 SOM Center Road, Mayfield Heights, OH 44124 (For Plaintiff-Appellee).

Vanessa R. Clapp, Lake County Public Defender, and Melissa A. Blake, Assistant Public Defender, 125 East Erie Street, Painesville, OH 44077 (For Defendant-Appellant).

OPINION

MATT LYNCH, J.

{¶1} Defendant-appellant, Brian E. Bentley, appeals from his conviction for Assault in the Painesville Municipal Court. For the following reasons, we affirm the judgment of the lower court.

{¶2} On September 10, 2020, a Complaint was filed in the Painesville Municipal Court, alleging that Bentley had committed Aggravated Trespass, a misdemeanor of the first degree, in violation of R.C. 2911.211(A), and Assault, a misdemeanor of the first degree, in violation of R.C. 2903.13(A).

{¶3} On December 14, 2020, Bentley filed a Demand for Trial by Jury, the matter was set and continued, and a bench trial was ultimately held. At the conclusion of the trial, the court stated "I don't think [Bentley's] at fault for the aggravated trespass because I don't think he went there initially to be an aggravated trespasser, but he's certainly guilty of the assault." In a form Judgment Entry, the following, with certain language circled, crossed out, or underlined, was included: "The defendant * * * entered a plea of guilty/no contest: (was found (guilty) after (jury) trial ) to the charges of: AGGR. TRESPASS M1 (ASSAULT M1). The defendant is hereby found guilty of those charges. The remaining charges are dismissed at the request of the State."

{¶4} Bentley appealed and we held that the lower court lacked jurisdiction to conduct a bench trial since Bentley had filed a request for a jury trial and had not waived that right. State v. Bentley , 11th Dist. Lake Nos. 2021-L-089 and 2021-L-090, 2022-Ohio-1099, 2022 WL 970727, ¶ 13. We reversed the conviction and remanded for a new trial, observing that Bentley has a right to a jury trial unless properly waived. Id. at ¶ 14.

{¶5} On remand, Bentley filed a written waiver of his right to a jury trial and the matter proceeded to a bench trial. Prior to the trial, defense counsel argued that double jeopardy barred retrial on the Aggravated Trespass charge since Bentley had already been acquitted. The court determined it should retry this charge since its prior judgment was void due to its lack of jurisdiction to conduct a bench trial. The following pertinent testimony and evidence were presented at trial.

{¶6} On September 7, 2020, Officer Ryan Shannon of the Madison Township Police Department responded to a call at the home of Shauna Adkins. Adkins was "extremely upset" and described that there had been a disagreement between her children and a neighbor child, and a subsequent confrontation occurred in which the child's father, Bentley, assaulted her. Shannon observed facial injuries to Adkins, including redness and swelling to her left eye.

{¶7} Shannon spoke with Bentley, who indicated that Adkins had come to his home to discuss the issue between their children and Bentley subsequently went to Adkins’ house to talk with her further. He described that "she came charging out of the back door with her hand raised leading him to believe that she was going to strike him." According to Shannon, Bentley first indicated that she tried to hit him and "he changed that to she did hit him." Shannon observed that Bentley had redness on his face and injuries to his left hand. Sergeant Douglas Covert also made contact with Bentley who was cooperative and indicated that he had acted in self-defense.

{¶8} Shauna Adkins testified that on the date of the incident, her son indicated that he had been bullied by a neighbor child, Bentley's son. She went to Bentley's house and told him and the child's mother about the incident. They did not want to do anything and "pretty much shut the door in [her] face." On her walk home, she became aware of a conflict between the same neighbor child and her older son.

{¶9} After Adkins returned home, Bentley came to her residence and knocked on the door. She stepped outside, he began cursing at her, and stated that she sent her son to beat up his child. He then punched her in the left eye with his right hand. Adkins described the impact of the hit, stating: "At that point, the impact to my eye was so strong it spun my body around, my head bounced off a rock, and I hit the ground." Adkins indicated that before Bentley hit her, she did not gesture at him, make aggressive movements, or touch him. After she was hit, her brother, Shane, came out of the house, tackled Bentley, and the two began fighting. Bentley then left, she called the police, and she was taken to the emergency room. She was treated for a concussion and lost central vision in her left eye.

{¶10} Patrolman Justin Dahl took photographs of Adkins’ injuries the day after the incident. He described that her left eye was swollen with a bruise about the size of a golf ball. Her forehead and back of her head were swollen and she had a contusion on her eyelid. There were also bruises on her leg and elbow and a scratch on her wrist.

{¶11} Brooke Spencer, Bentley's girlfriend, lives with Bentley and their children. She testified that on September 7, Adkins came to their door complaining about their children "playing chicken on their bikes" and was being loud and aggressive. As Adkins was walking away, she made a comment which Spencer believed meant Adkins was going to have her child beat up Spencer and Bentley's child. Spencer subsequently discovered that her son had been "beat * * * up" by Adkins’ child. After she informed Bentley of this incident, he went to Adkins’ home. According to Spencer, Adkins and Bentley argued and Adkins began "backing him up to the car" in the driveway, she punched him, and Bentley hit her back. The brother than rushed from the house, tackled Bentley, and threatened him.

{¶12} Bentley described the incident originating when Adkins came to their home and was discussing with his girlfriend an incident between their sons. Adkins made a comment about having her son take care of it. He later learned that his son had been beaten up by Adkins’ son. He instructed his girlfriend and children to go to Adkins’ home to call the police on her. He also went to her home and knocked on the door with no response. He then approached the side of the house and she came out "angry and aggressive * * * with her hand up telling me that I wasn't going to threaten with the police." She was pointing and cursing and then punched him in his left eye. He then hit her "one time in self-defense." He explained that she had been walking toward him so he had his back up against a van and "had nowhere to go." Pictures of redness on his face were presented that he testified was caused by Adkins. After he returned the punch, her brother tackled him and they got into a tussle.

{¶13} The court found a lack of evidence that Bentley went on the property to commit an offense for the purposes of an Aggravated Trespass conviction. It found him guilty of Assault. It sentenced him to a term of 90 days in jail and 90 days of electronically monitored house arrest. Bentley's requests to stay the sentence were denied in the trial court and this court.

{¶14} Bentley timely appeals and raises the following assignments of error:

{¶15} "[1.] The trial court erred to the prejudice of the defendant-appellant when it denied his motion for acquittal made pursuant to Crim.R. 29(A).

{¶16} "[2.] The trial court erred to the prejudice of the defendant-appellant when it returned a verdict of guilty against the manifest weight of the evidence.

{¶17} "[3.] The trial court erred to the prejudice of the defendant-appellant when it retried him on the offense of aggravated trespass after he had been previously found not guilty of that offense in violation of the defendant's protection against double jeopardy and in violation of the defendant's right to a fair trial as guaranteed by the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution and Section 10, Article I of the Ohio Constitution."

{¶18} In his first and second assignments of error, Bentley argues that the lower court erred in denying his motion for acquittal and that his conviction for Assault was against the weight of the evidence, raising questions as to the credibility of the victim and whether he struck her in self-defense. We will address these assignments jointly as they are interrelated.

{¶19} "Pursuant to Crim.R. 29(A), a court shall not order an entry of judgment of acquittal if the evidence is such that reasonable minds can reach different conclusions as to whether each material element of a crime has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt." State v. Bridgeman , 55 Ohio St.2d 261, 381 N.E.2d 184 (1978), syllabus. "Thus, when an appellant makes a Crim.R. 29 motion, he or she is challenging the sufficiency of the evidence introduced by the state." (Citation omitted.) State v. Hastings , 11th Dist. Portage No. 2020-P-0014, 2021-Ohio-662, 2021 WL 857650, ¶ 23. In reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence, "[t]he relevant inquiry is whether, after viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime proven beyond a reasonable doubt." State v. Jenks , 61 Ohio St.3d 259, 574 N.E.2d 492 (1991), paragraph two of the syllabus, following Jackson v. Virginia , 443 U.S. 307, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979).

{¶20} Whereas "sufficiency of the evidence is a test of adequacy as to whether the evidence is legally sufficient to support a verdict as a matter of law, * * * weight of the evidence addresses the evidence's effect of inducing belief." State v. Wilson , 113 Ohio St.3d 382, 2007-Ohio-2202, ...