State v. Noah , 2022 Ohio 1315 ( 2022 )

[Cite as State v. Noah, 2022-Ohio-1315.]
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO
EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA
STATE OF OHIO, :
Plaintiff-Appellee, :
No. 110664
v. :
JOSEPH R. NOAH, :
Defendant-Appellant. :
JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION
JUDGMENT: AFFIRMED
RELEASED AND JOURNALIZED: April 21, 2022
Criminal Appeal from the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas
Case No. CR-19-644599-B
Appearances:
Michael C. O’Malley, Cuyahoga County Prosecuting
Attorney, and Jasmine Jackson, Assistant Prosecuting
Attorney, for appellee.
Cullen Sweeney, Cuyahoga County Public Defender, and
Noelle A. Powell, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.
KATHLEEN ANN KEOUGH, P.J.:
Defendant-appellant, Joseph R. Noah, appeals his conviction for
felonious assault following a jury trial. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.
In October 2019, Noah and codefendant David Antio (“Antio”) were
named in a single-count indictment charging them both with felonious assault, a
felony of the second degree.
The charges arose after Noah and Antio physically attacked David
Asmondy in the parking lot behind Bar 30. Surveillance video captured the assault.
The video evidence played for the jury showed Noah and Antio pushing and
punching Asmondy between two parked vehicles. Asmondy also testified at trial
that the men kicked him and dragged him out from under a vehicle when he tried to
escape. He was eventually able to run away and call the police.
Photographic evidence taken by police who responded to the scene
captured Asmondy’s physical injuries, including redness to his face and eye-area,
abrasions to the back of his neck and the side of his face — including his jaw, neck,
and ear and abrasions and bruising to his chest and shoulder areas. Asmondy was
taken to University Hospitals Parma Medical Center where he was diagnosed with a
fractured nose. He testified that he went to Southwest Hospital the following day
after having difficulty breathing and seeing. Asmondy’s medical records were
admitted at trial, from which Asmondy testified that he suffered a concussion. As a
result of his injuries, he stated that he attended physical therapy to help with his
vision issues.
The jury found Noah guilty of felonious assault, and the trial court
sentenced him to 18 months of community-control sanctions, which included
serving eight weekends in jail.
Noah now appeals, raising as his sole assignment of error that the
state presented insufficient evidence to support his felonious assault conviction, in
violation of his rights to due process and a fair trial under the Fifth and Fourteenth
Amendments to the United States Constitution and Article I, Section 10 of the Ohio
Constitution. Specifically, he contends that the state presented insufficient evidence
to prove the element of “serious physical harm” as defined in R.C. 2901.01(A)(5)(a)-
(e).
An appellate court’s function when reviewing the sufficiency of the
evidence to support a criminal conviction is to examine the evidence admitted at
trial to determine whether such evidence, if believed, would convince the average
mind of the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. State v. Murphy, 91 Ohio
St.3d 516, 543, 747 N.E.2d 765 (2001). “‘The 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. Walker, 150 Ohio St.3d 409, 2016-Ohio-829, 82 N.E.3d
1124, ¶ 12, quoting State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259, 574 N.E.2d 492 (1991),
paragraph two of the syllabus. The test for sufficiency requires a determination of
whether the prosecution met its burden of production at trial. State v. Bowden, 8th
Dist. Cuyahoga No. 92266, 2009-Ohio-3598, ¶ 12.
R.C. 2903.11, regarding felonious assault, provides that “no person
shall knowingly cause serious physical harm to another.” R.C. 2901.01(A)(5) defines
“serious physical harm,” in relevant part, as:
(c) Any physical harm that involves some permanent incapacity,
whether partial or total, or that involves some temporary, substantial
incapacity;
***
(e) Any physical harm that involves acute pain of such duration as to
result in substantial suffering or that involves any degree of prolonged
or intractable pain.
In this case, the jury viewed the surveillance video showing Noah and
Antio punching and kicking Asmondy. The jury also viewed photographs taken by
the police immediately following the attack that depicted injury to Asmondy’s face
and body, including redness to his face and abrasions to his jaw, neck, chest, and
shoulder areas. Additionally, the state presented Asmondy’s medical records to the
jury, which indicated that Asmondy suffered a fractured nose and a concussion.
Finally, Asmondy testified that he suffered pain to his head, chest, and back. He
stated that he had “horrible headaches” and that he subsequently sought additional
medical treatment for breathing and vision difficulties, which resulted in seeing a
physical therapist. Accordingly, we find that the state presented sufficient evidence
demonstrating that Asmondy suffered serious physical harm as a result of the
unprovoked attack.
Noah contends that Asmondy’s medical records were inconsistent or
that they did not support his claimed injuries. Additionally, he contends that the
state mischaracterized the evidence by claiming that Asmondy suffered a
concussion. These arguments are more akin to a challenge to the weight of the
evidence, not sufficiency. But even if we considered these alleged inconsistencies,
this is not the exceptional case where the evidence weighed heavily against
conviction because the medical records showed that Asmondy suffered a fractured
nose. Contrary to Noah’s assertion otherwise, a broken nose is sufficient to
constitute serious physical harm. See State v. Daniels, 14 Ohio App.3d 41, 469
N.E.2d 1338 (1st Dist.1984) (evidence of broken nose and swollen face sufficient to
support the element of “serious physical harm.”).
Accordingly, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the
state, we find that the state presented sufficient evidence to support Noah’s felonious
assault conviction. The assignment of error is overruled.
Judgment affirmed.
It is ordered that appellee recover from appellant costs herein taxed.
The court finds there were reasonable grounds for this appeal.
It is ordered that a special mandate issue out of this court directing the
common pleas court to carry this judgment into execution. The defendant’s
conviction having been affirmed, any bail pending is terminated. Case remanded to
the trial court for execution of sentence.
A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to Rule 27
of the Rules of Appellate Procedure.
KATHLEEN ANN KEOUGH, PRESIDING JUDGE
LISA B. FORBES, J., and
EILEEN T. GALLAGHER, J., CONCUR