Login | July 05, 2025
Judges affirm domestic violence conviction in 'he said, she said' case
JESSICA SHAMBAUGH
Special to the Legal News
Published: November 11, 2014
Finding that the trial court properly assessed witness credibility, the 12th District Court of Appeals has affirmed a man’s conviction for domestic violence.
Defendant Adam Chasteen recently lost his appeal from the Hamilton Municipal Court alleging his conviction was against the manifest weight and sufficiency of the evidence.
The facts of the case state that Chasteen was charged with domestic violence and violation of a protection order in September 2013. Both charges were listed as first-degree misdemeanors.
Chasteen was tried before a bench in the municipal court and both he and the alleged victim offered their own version of events.
Rachel Lynch testified she was the mother of Chasteen’s daughter and had previously obtained a protection order against him.
Nevertheless, she said Chasteen came to her home uninvited and assaulted her.
Specifically, Lynch stated that she was home when she heard a noise coming from her kitchen. When she went to investigate, she found Chasteen in her house.
Lynch acknowledged that she had been drinking that night and said she reached for a Taser that she kept because of her history with Chasteen.
Before she could reach it, however, she said Chasteen grabbed her arm and pushed her against a wall.
The state introduced several photographs showing the bruises she received during the altercation.
Chasteen denied going to the home uninvited, but instead stated that Lynch asked him to come over and the two talked and drank Southern Comfort for a couple hours.
He said the physical altercation only broke out after Lynch attacked and bit him.
As evidence, he introduced several taped recordings.
Lynch disputed when the recordings were made and even questioned if it was her voice on some of them.
The trial court elected to believe Lynch’s version of events and found Chasteen guilty of both charges.
It sentenced him to 30 days, with all of that time suspended, and ordered him to pay costs.
On appeal, Chasteen challenged only his conviction for domestic violence.
“We note that ‘a conviction is not against the manifest weight of the evidence simply because the jury believed the prosecution testimony,’” wrote 12th District Presiding Judge Robert Ringland, citing State v. Coleman, 2011-Ohio-4564.
The three-judge appellate panel noted that in Chasteen’s case, the trial court simply chose to believe Lynch’s testimony over Chasteen’s.
“The credibility of the witnesses is paramount in cases such as this where the evidence amounts to little more than a matter of ‘he said, she said,’” Judge Ringland stated.
The judges found no evidence that the trial court lost its way or created a manifest miscarriage of justice in its findings.
Instead, they held that the trial court was in the best position to determine witness credibility and properly exercised its rights as trier of fact.
Judges Stephen Powell and Robin Piper concurred and the trio affirmed the lower court’s ruling.
The case is cited State v. Chasteen, 2014-Ohio-4622.
Copyright © 2014 The Daily Reporter - All Rights Reserved