self-defense claim in Ohio

2025A self-defense claim under R.C. 2901.05(B)(1) includes three elements: “(1) that the defendant was not at fault in creating the situation giving rise to the affray; (2) that the defendant had a bona fide belief that he [or she] was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that his [or her] only means of escape from such danger was in the use of such force; and (3) that the defendant did not violate any duty to retreat or avoid the danger.” State v. Messenger, 2022-Ohio-4562, ¶ 14 , quoting State v. Barnes, 94 Ohio St.3d 21, 24 (2002).

2025“To accomplish this, the State must disprove beyond a reasonable doubt at least one of the elements of self-defense.” Id., citing State v. Gutierrez-Reynoso, 2023-Ohio-3122, ¶ 72 (11th Dist.). {¶ 24} The elements of a self-defense claim are: “ ‘(1) that the defendant was not at fault in creating the situation giving rise to the affray; (2) that the defendant had a bona fide belief that he [or she] was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that his [or her] only means of escape from such danger was in the use of such force; and (3) that the defendant did not violate any duty to r

2026“The state’s new burden of disproving the defendant’s self- defense claim beyond a reasonable doubt is subject to a manifest-weight review on appeal[.]” State v. Messenger, 2022-Ohio-4562, ¶ 27 . {¶ 34} When a defendant asserts he used deadly force in self-defense, as in this case, the state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt at least one of the following elements to negate the self-defense claim: (1) the accused was at fault in creating the situation giving rise to the affray, (2) the accused did not have a bona fide belief that he was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm for wh

2026“If, at the trial of a person who is accused of an offense that involved the person’s use of force against another, there is evidence presented that tends to support that the accused person used the force in self-defense . . . , the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused person did not use the force in self-defense . . . .” Id. {¶ 22} The foregoing statute “places the initial burden of producing evidence ‘that tends to support’ a self-defense claim on the defendant.” State v. Bowen, 2024-Ohio-1079, ¶ 11 (2d Dist.), quoting R.C. 2901.05(B)(1). “[I]f the defendant’s ev

2025Dist.). “‘The discretionary power to grant a new trial should be exercised only in the exceptional case in which the evidence weighs 10. heavily against the conviction.’” State v. Lang, 2011-Ohio-4215, ¶ 220 , quoting State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380, 387 (1997). {¶ 34} Relevant here, the “not at fault” element of a self-defense claim “does not require in all situations that the defendant must have refrained from throwing the first punch or a showing that the defendant played no part in creating the situation giving rise to the affray.” State v. Himes, 2023-Ohio-3561, ¶ 25 (12th Dist.).

2023In a manifest-weight challenge, we “ ‘consider[] the credibility of witnesses and determine[] whether in resolving conflicts in the evidence, the [trier of fact] clearly lost its way and created such a manifest miscarriage of justice that the conviction must be reversed and a new trial ordered.’ ” Id., quoting State v. Martin, 20 Ohio App.3d 172, 175 , 485 N.E.2d 717 (1st Dist.1983). {¶9} To succeed on a self-defense claim involving the use of deadly force, a defendant must show “(1) the defendant was not at fault in creating the situation giving rise to the affray; (2) the defendant had a bon

2026“The state’s [] burden of disproving the defendant’s self-defense claim beyond a reasonable doubt is subject to a manifest-weight review on appeal.” Messenger at ¶ 27 . {¶ 76} When an appellate court reviews whether a conviction is against the manifest weight of the evidence, “ ‘[t]he court, reviewing the entire record, weighs the evidence and all reasonable inferences, considers the credibility of witnesses and determines whether in resolving the conflicts in the evidence, the jury clearly lost its way and created such a manifest miscarriage of justice that the conviction must be reversed and

2024But a new trial is warranted only “ ‘in the exceptional case in which the evidence weighs heavily against conviction.’ ” Id., quoting Martin at 175. {¶ 208} Although Knuff’s self-defense claim is not subject to review for sufficiency of the evidence, “[t]he state’s * * * burden of disproving the defendant’s self-defense claim beyond a reasonable doubt is subject to a manifest-weight review on appeal,” Messenger at ¶ 27. {¶ 209} Here, the jury did not lose its way and create a manifest miscarriage of justice.

2026However, "the first element of a self-defense claim does not require in all situations that the [defendant] must have refrained from throwing the first punch." State v. Nichols, 2002-Ohio-415 (4th Dist.); State v. Gillespie, 2007-Ohio-3439, ¶ 17 (2d Dist.).

2025The first prong of the self-defense test, therefore, “requires a defendant to show that he did ‘not engage in such wrongful conduct toward his assailant that the assailant was provoked to attack the defendant as he did.’” Gaston at ¶ 16 , quoting State v. Gillespie, 2007-Ohio-3439, ¶ 17 (2d Dist.).

2025No. 11AP-939, 2012-Ohio-3586 , ¶ 15. {¶ 42} The second element of a self-defense claim employs “a combined subjective and objective test.” State v. Thomas, 77 Ohio St.3d 323, 330 (1997).

2025B. {¶14} The second element of a self-defense claim is whether the defendant “had a bona fide belief that [he] was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that [his] only means of escape was the use of force.” State v. Thomas, 77 Ohio St.3d 323, 330 (1997), citing State v. Williford, 49 Ohio St.3d 247, 249 (1990), citing State v. Robbins, 58 Ohio St.2d 74 (1979), paragraph two of the syllabus.

2026State v. Knuff, 2024-Ohio-902, ¶ 191 . 7 {¶ 24} The elements of a self-defense claim when deadly force is used are: “(1) that the defendant was not at fault in creating the situation giving rise to the affray; (2) that the defendant had a bona fide belief that he was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that his only means of escape from such danger was in the use of such force; and (3) that the defendant did not violate any duty to retreat or avoid the danger.” State v. Barnes, 2002-Ohio-68, ¶ 11 , citing State v. Robbins, 58 Ohio St.2d 74 (1979), paragraph two of the syllabus

2025B. {¶14} The second element of a self-defense claim is whether the defendant “had a bona fide belief that [he] was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that [his] only means of escape was the use of force.” State v. Thomas, 77 Ohio St.3d 323, 330 (1997), citing State v. Williford, 49 Ohio St.3d 247, 249 (1990), citing State v. Robbins, 58 Ohio St.2d 74 (1979), paragraph two of the syllabus.

2025State v. Asp, 2023-Ohio-290, ¶ 55 (5th Dist.), citing State v. Paskins, 2022-Ohio-4024, ¶ 48 (5th Dist.). {¶12} To be sure, a defendant’s burden of showing, under R.C. 2901.05(B)(1), that evidence has been presented that “tends to support” a self-defense claim “is not a heavy one and . . . might even be satisfied through the state's own evidence.” Messenger at ¶ 22 .

2023In raising this error, Greer acknowledges that at the time of briefing, the issues of the proper procedure for burden-shifting and the appropriate standard for 12. appellate review of a self-defense claim were before the Ohio Supreme Court in a case that has now been released as State v. Messenger, Slip Opinion No. 2022-Ohio-4562 . {¶ 33} To support a claim of self-defense involving the use of non-deadly force, a defendant must show that “(1) he was not at fault in creating the situation giving rise to the affray; (2) he had reasonable grounds to believe or an honest belief that he or she was

2026“If, at the trial of a person who is accused of an offense that involved the person’s use of force against another, there is evidence presented that tends to support that the accused person used the force in self-defense . . . , the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused person did not use the force in self-defense . . . .” Id. {¶ 22} The foregoing statute “places the initial burden of producing evidence ‘that tends to support’ a self-defense claim on the defendant.” State v. Bowen, 2024-Ohio-1079, ¶ 11 (2d Dist.), quoting R.C. 2901.05(B)(1). “[I]f the defendant’s ev

2025Manifest Weight of the Evidence {¶ 25} “R.C. 2901.05(B)(1) places the initial burden of producing evidence ‘that tends to support’ a self-defense claim on the defendant.” State v. Bowen, 2024-Ohio-1079, ¶ 11 (2d Dist.). “‘[I]f the defendant's evidence and any reasonable inferences about that evidence would allow a rational trier of fact to find all the elements of a self-defense claim when viewed in the light most favorable to the defendant, then the defendant has satisfied the burden.’” State v. Palmer, 2024-Ohio-539, ¶ 20 , quoting State v. Messenger, 2022-Ohio-4562, ¶ 25 .

2026Thus, to defeat a self-defense claim, “the State must ‘disprove at least one of the elements of self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt.’” Passmore at ¶ 29 , quoting State v. Carney, 2020-Ohio-2691, ¶ 31 (10th Dist.). {¶19} On appeal, Laidlaw contends that the weight of the evidence supports his claim of self-defense.

2026Thus, to defeat a self-defense claim, “the State must ‘disprove at least one of the elements of self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt.’” Passmore at ¶ 29 , quoting State v. Carney, 2020-Ohio-2691, ¶ 31 (10th Dist.). {¶19} On appeal, Alexander contends that the greater weight of the evidence supports his claim of self-defense.

2026“In determining whether the defendant presented evidence tending to support a self-defense claim, the trial court considers all of the evidence, from all sources, construed most strongly in the defendant’s favor.” Weemes at ¶ 31 . “‘The elements of self-defense are cumulative, and a defendant’s claim of self-defense fails if any one of the -8- Case No. 14-25-28 elements is not present.’” State v. Passmore, 2023-Ohio-3209, ¶ 29 (3d Dist.), quoting State v. Ridley, 2022-Ohio-2561, ¶ 15 (1st Dist.). {¶18} Once a defendant presents a viable self-defense claim, the State bears the burden to prove,

2026“In determining whether the defendant presented evidence tending to support a self-defense claim, the trial court considers all of the evidence, from all sources, construed most strongly in the defendant’s favor.” Weemes at ¶ 31 . “‘The elements of self-defense are cumulative, and a defendant’s claim of self-defense fails if any one of the elements is not present.’” State v. Passmore, 2023-Ohio-3209, ¶ 29 (3d Dist.), quoting State v. Ridley, 2022-Ohio-2561, ¶ 15 (1st Dist.). {¶18} Once a defendant presents a viable self-defense claim, the State bears the burden to prove, beyond a reasonable do

2024But “[i]f the evidence generates only a mere speculation or possible doubt, such evidence is insufficient to raise the affirmative defense, and submission of the issue to the jury will be unwarranted.” Id. {¶ 37} A self-defense claim requires a defendant to produce evidence “(1) that the defendant was not at fault in creating the situation giving rise to the affray; (2) that the defendant had a bona fide belief that he was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that his only means of escape from such danger was in the use of such force; and (3) that the defendant did not violate

2024But “[i]f the evidence generates only a mere speculation or possible doubt, such evidence is insufficient to raise the affirmative defense, and submission of the issue to the jury will be unwarranted.” Id. {¶ 37} A self-defense claim requires a defendant to produce evidence “(1) that the defendant was not at fault in creating the situation giving rise to the affray; (2) that the defendant had a bona fide belief that he was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that his only means of escape from such danger was in the use of such force; and (3) that the defendant did not violate

2026“In determining whether the defendant presented evidence tending to support a self-defense claim, the trial court considers all of the evidence, from all sources, construed most strongly in the defendant’s favor.” Weemes at ¶ 31 . “‘The elements of self-defense are cumulative, and a defendant’s claim of self-defense fails if any one of the -8- Case No. 14-25-28 elements is not present.’” State v. Passmore, 2023-Ohio-3209, ¶ 29 (3d Dist.), quoting State v. Ridley, 2022-Ohio-2561, ¶ 15 (1st Dist.). {¶18} Once a defendant presents a viable self-defense claim, the State bears the burden to prove,

2026“In determining whether the defendant presented evidence tending to support a self-defense claim, the trial court considers all of the evidence, from all sources, construed most strongly in the defendant’s favor.” Weemes at ¶ 31 . “‘The elements of self-defense are cumulative, and a defendant’s claim of self-defense fails if any one of the elements is not present.’” State v. Passmore, 2023-Ohio-3209, ¶ 29 (3d Dist.), quoting State v. Ridley, 2022-Ohio-2561, ¶ 15 (1st Dist.). {¶18} Once a defendant presents a viable self-defense claim, the State bears the burden to prove, beyond a reasonable do

2025No. 2012 CA 20, 2013-Ohio-2229, ¶ 15 (“The use of a gun constitutes the use of deadly force.”); R.C. 2901.01(A)(2) (defining “[d]eadly force” as “any force that carries a substantial risk that it will proximately result in the death of any person”). {¶ 40} When deadly force is used, the state must disprove beyond a reasonable doubt at least one of the following elements of a self-defense claim: (1) the accused was not at fault in creating the situation giving rise to the affray; (2) the accused had a bona fide belief that he was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that his onl

2025“The use of a gun constitutes the use of deadly force.” State v. Dale, 2013-Ohio-2229, ¶ 15 (2d Dist.). {¶20} The elements of a self-defense claim involving deadly force are “(1) that the defendant was not at fault in creating the situation giving rise to the affray; (2) that the defendant had a bona fide belief that he [or she] was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that his [or her] only means of escape from such danger was in the use of such force; and (3) that the defendant did not violate any duty to retreat or avoid the danger.” (Bracketed text in original.) State v. Me

2026“A defendant is entitled to a self-defense jury instruction when he presents legally sufficient evidence for every element of a self-defense claim.” State v. Palmer, 2024-Ohio-539, ¶ 20 .

2025“A defendant is entitled to a self-defense jury instruction when [s]he presents legally sufficient evidence for every element of a self-defense claim.” State v. Palmer, 2024-Ohio-539, ¶ 1 .

2021Ineffective Assistance of Counsel {¶ 35} In her second assignment of error, Henderson asserts that her constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel was violated when trial counsel chose not to seek a self-defense instruction. {¶ 36} To prevail on an ineffective assistance of counsel claim, a defendant must prove that his or her attorney was ineffective under the standard test from Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984).

2021Ineffective Assistance of Counsel {¶ 35} In her second assignment of error, Henderson asserts that her constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel was violated when trial counsel chose not to seek a self-defense instruction. {¶ 36} To prevail on an ineffective assistance of counsel claim, a defendant must prove that his or her attorney was ineffective under the standard test from Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984).

2024"And when a trial court refuses to give a requested jury instruction, the -7- Clermont CA2023-04-022 proper standard of review is whether the trial court abused its discretion under the facts and circumstances of the case." Id. {¶ 24} In deciding whether a self-defense instruction should be given, the trial court must view the evidence in a light most favorable to the defendant without regard to credibility.

2020See State v. Jackson, 22 Ohio St.3d 281, 284 , 490 N.E.2d 893 (1986). {¶ 35} The basis for Sain’s self-defense claim was his own testimony at the motion to withdraw hearing that he kept a loaded handgun in his vehicle located between the -15- driver’s seat and the middle console.

2026See State v. Brooks, 2022-Ohio-2478, ¶ 24 (indicating that an error of law regarding a self- defense instruction may be harmless if, based on the evidence presented, the defendant would not have been entitled to a self-defense instruction).

2025See also State v. Brooks, 170 Ohio St.3d 1 , 2022-Ohio-2478, ¶ 23 (holding that House Bill 228’s burden-shifting amendment to R.C. 2901.05 “applies prospectively to all trials occurring after its effective date, regardless of when the underlying alleged criminal conduct occurred”); State v. Messenger, 171 Ohio St.3d 227 , 2022-Ohio-4562, ¶ 19-25 (holding the state’s burden of persuasion is not triggered until the defendant produces “legally sufficient evidence” supporting each element of self-defense). {¶ 83} The Ohio legislature did not, however, statutorily define “self-defense” or otherwise

2024Thus, Reed contends the trial court erred in relying on the testimony of defense witnesses that the injury occurred near H.M.’s vehicle when H.M. slipped and fell. {¶ 27} In reviewing decisions denying requested jury instructions, the proper standard is “whether the trial court abused its discretion under the facts and circumstances of the case.” State v. Palmer, 2024-Ohio-539, ¶ 16 , citing State v. Wolons, 44 Ohio St.3d 64, 68 (1989). “ ‘A self-defense claim includes the following -13- elements: (1) that the defendant was not at fault in creating the situation giving rise to the affray; (2)

2020Preservation of this issue for appeal {¶ 21} Lastly, we consider whether, as the State argues, Taylor waived her objection to the trial court’s decision not to give the self-defense instruction for the improper-handling offense. -8- {¶ 22} The Ohio Supreme Court has said that “[a] party does not waive his objections to the court’s charge by failing to formally object thereto (1) where the record affirmatively shows that a trial court has been fully apprised of the correct law governing a material issue in dispute, and (2) the requesting party has been unsuccessful in obtaining the inclusion of

2026State v. Knuff, 2024-Ohio-902, ¶ 191 . {¶ 15} The State’s burden of disproving a defendant’s self-defense claim beyond a reasonable doubt is subject to manifest weight review on appeal.

2026State v. Knuff, 2024-Ohio-902, ¶ 191 . 7 {¶ 24} The elements of a self-defense claim when deadly force is used are: “(1) that the defendant was not at fault in creating the situation giving rise to the affray; (2) that the defendant had a bona fide belief that he was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that his only means of escape from such danger was in the use of such force; and (3) that the defendant did not violate any duty to retreat or avoid the danger.” State v. Barnes, 2002-Ohio-68, ¶ 11 , citing State v. Robbins, 58 Ohio St.2d 74 (1979), paragraph two of the syllabus

2025B. {¶14} The second element of a self-defense claim is whether the defendant “had a bona fide belief that [he] was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that [his] only means of escape was the use of force.” State v. Thomas, 77 Ohio St.3d 323, 330 (1997), citing State v. Williford, 49 Ohio St.3d 247, 249 (1990), citing State v. Robbins, 58 Ohio St.2d 74 (1979), paragraph two of the syllabus.

2015Furthermore, Parker told the police detectives that “he should have stayed home and he wouldn’t be in this trouble right now.” {¶43} Upon review, we cannot say that the court erred in rejecting Parker’s self-defense theory, as he failed to present convincing evidence regarding all three prongs of the self-defense test articulated in Williford, 49 Ohio St.3d 247 , 551 N.E.2d 1279 .

2025If the defendant produces evidence tending to support a self-defense claim, then the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused did not act in self-defense.” Id. {¶19} “The elements of self-defense differ depending on whether the defendant used deadly or non-deadly force to defend himself.” State v. Eddy, 2022- Ohio-3965, ¶ 14 (3d Dist.).

2022Because of the difficulties inherent in making the evaluation, a court must indulge a strong presumption that counsel's conduct falls within the wide range of reasonable professional assistance; that is, the defendant must overcome the presumption that, under the circumstances, the challenged action ‘might be considered sound trial strategy.’ ” Id. at 689 , quoting Michel v. Louisiana, 350 U.S. 91, 101 , 76 S.Ct. 158 , 100 L.Ed. 83 (1955). {¶ 38} With these standards in mind, we will consider whether trial counsel was -21- ineffective in failing to ask for a self-defense instruction.

2026State v. Knuff, 2024-Ohio-902, ¶ 191 . 7 {¶ 24} The elements of a self-defense claim when deadly force is used are: “(1) that the defendant was not at fault in creating the situation giving rise to the affray; (2) that the defendant had a bona fide belief that he was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that his only means of escape from such danger was in the use of such force; and (3) that the defendant did not violate any duty to retreat or avoid the danger.” State v. Barnes, 2002-Ohio-68, ¶ 11 , citing State v. Robbins, 58 Ohio St.2d 74 (1979), paragraph two of the syllabus

2026Id. at ¶ 27, 26. {¶106} The elements of a self-defense claim are: “(1) that the defendant was not at fault in creating the situation giving rise to the affray; (2) that the defendant had a bona fide belief that he [or she] was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that his [or her] only means of escape from such danger was in the use of such force; and (3) that the defendant did not violate any duty to retreat or avoid the danger.” Id. at ¶ 14, quoting State v. Barnes, 2002-Ohio-68, ¶ 11 . {¶107} In this case, Appellant was lawfully present in a public place and therefore had no

2026State v. Wilson, 2024-Ohio-776 .

2026In Ohio, a person may use deadly force in self- defense when he or she (1) ‘“was not at fault in creating the situation giving rise to the affray”’; (2) ‘“had a bona fide belief that he [or she] was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that his [or her] only means of escape from such danger was in the use of such force”’; and (3) ‘“did not violate any duty to retreat or avoid the danger.”’ State v. Wilson, 2024-Ohio-776, ¶ 20 , citing State v. Messenger, 2022-Ohio-4562, ¶ 14 , quoting State v. Barnes, 94 Ohio St.3d 21, 24 (2002). “[W]hen a defendant presents evidence that tends

2026Moreover, the statutory elements of an offense “and the existence of self-defense are separate issues.” Id. {¶23} A self-defense claim places upon the defendant “the burden of producing legally sufficient evidence” on each self-defense element.

2025By challenging the state’s evidence regarding the elements of felonious assault, appellant does not address the effect of her assertion of self-defense. “[T]his defense admits the facts claimed by the prosecution and then relies on independent facts or circumstances which the defendant claims exempt him from liability.” (Citation omitted) State v. Martin, 21 Ohio St.3d 91, 94 (1986), superseded by statute on other grounds as noted in State v. Brooks, 2022- Ohio-2478, ¶ 15 (“The only thing that the amendments to R.C. 2901.05 changes is which party has the burden of proving of disproving a self-