[T]he State has provided competent credible evidence to prove that Mr. Culbertson caused injury to Sgt. Jones as defined in the assault statue.
State v. Culbertson
Fifth District Appellate Court
Stark County, Ohio
February 2, 2026
Why is this case important?
State v. Culbertson reinforces that officers do not need to prove significant injury to sustain a conviction for assault on a peace officer – even minimal force, such as a slap, can satisfy the “physical harm” element, and an attempt alone is sufficient under O.R.C. §2903.13. The case also highlights the importance of officer articulation, body camera footage, and injury documentation, all of which supported the conviction despite defense efforts to minimize the conduct as mere “touching.”
Background
On December 15, 2024 Sergeant Michael Jones, a patrol sergeant with the City of Alliance Police Department, and other officers responded to a call at 170 East Main Street – the Towne Tavern. When Sgt. Jones entered Towne Tavern, he was met at the front door by Mr. Emanuel Culbertson.
The Towne Tavern at 170 East Main Street in Alliance, Ohio was the location of the incident that led to Mr. Culbertsons arrest, conviction and appeal.
Mr. Culbertson Threatens Sgt. Jones with Physical Violence
Mr. Culbertson followed Sgt. Jones to the back of the tavern wherein he and Sgt. Jones had a verbal exchange. During this exchange, Mr. Culbertson threatened to slap the shit out of Sgt. Jones and rip his fucking face off. Mr. Culbertson then deliberately struck Sgt. Jones on the left side of his face.
Mr. Culbertson Attacks Sgt. Jones
A physical scuffle between Sgt. Jones and Mr. Culbertson followed wherein Mr. Culbertson attempted to grab Sgt. Jones around the neck and threw several punches.
Assault on a Police Officer and Obstructing Official Business
Mr. Culbertson was charged with Assault in violation of O.R.C. §2903.13(A)(C)(5)(a) and Obstructing Official Police Business in violation of O.R.C. §2921.131 (A)(B)(5).
Trial – Found Guilty
Mr. Culbertson waived his right to a jury trial, and the case proceeded to a bench trial wherein he was found guilty of Assault and not guilty of Obstructing Official Business.
Appeal
Officer Jesse Binkley along with Sgt. Jones, responded to the call and went to Towne Tavern on December 15, 2024. Both patrolmen were wearing body cameras during their response.
The State and defense counsel both questioned the patrolmen and referenced body camera footage in support of their cases.
Note: There were four appeals filed in this case. Only two will be evaluated in this article.
Recitation of Cross Examination
During cross examination, defense counsel questioned both officers regarding the videos and relied on the footage to support his defense. He asked Officer Binkley, “And from you now observing your point of view camera video, you would agree with me that Mr. Culbertson extended his right hand towards the face of Sgt. Jones, correct?” He questioned Sgt. Jones, “We saw the video sir, he never stood up, he continued rendering aid to the individual on the ground, correct.” He also asked Sgt. Jones, “Did you just hear yourself saying, Do it, do it right now?”
Defense counsel also relied upon the videos to support his defense by requesting that one of them be played a second time. Then stating, “Oh, we didn’t see your head whip around . . . .”
Video Review
The trial judge also requested that two of the segments be played a second time.
Photo Review
During direct examination of Sgt. Jones, the State presented three photos to Sgt. Jones. “I’m going to show you what’s been marked as State’s Exhibit 3A, 3B and 3C. *** Do you recognize those?” Defense counsel also questioned Sgt. Jones regarding the photos provided by the State.
Prosecution Failed to Formally Admit the Exhibits Into Evidence
At the conclusion of the hearing, the state rested. The trial judge asked the prosecuting attorney, “Subject to the admittance of the three exhibits?” Even though the prosecuting attorney responded in the affirmative to the judge’s question; he failed to formally admit the exhibits into evidence.
Defense Counsel Calls His Client a Drunk Fool
Defense counsel did not call any witnesses but made a closing statement to the court. During this statement, defense counsel clearly relies on the videos in stating, “That’s what we saw here, Your Honor, a drunk fool that should never have gone anywhere near what was going on. But I think you can tell form the video there was no slap here ….”
Sentencing
At the conclusion of defense counsel’s closing statement and without the State’s exhibits formally admitted into evidence, the trial judge proceeded directly to sentencing.
Mr. Culbertson argues in his second assignment of error that Ohio’s assault statute requires actual, physical harm.
Mr. Culbertson argues in his second assignment of error that Ohio’s assault statute requires actual, physical harm rather than mere unwanted touching or embarrassment; therefore, his conviction is against the manifest weight of the evidence.
Mr. Culbertson argues in his third assignment of error that the officers’ testimony demonstrates that while touching may have occurred, there was no physical harm let alone an attempt to cause physical harm.
Mr. Culbertson argues in his third assignment of error that the officers’ testimony demonstrates that while touching may have occurred, there was no physical harm let alone an attempt to cause physical harm; therefore, the State failed to present sufficient evidence to sustain his conviction.
This Court will address Mr. Culbertson’s second and third assignments of error together.
Assault on a Police Officer – O.R.C. §2903.13
Mr. Culbertson was charged with Assault in violation of O.R.C. §2903.13(A)(C)(5)(a) which states, (A) No person shall knowingly cause or attempt to cause physical harm to another or to another’s unborn. * * * (C)(5) If the assault is committed in any of the following circumstances, assault is a felony of the fourth degree: (a) The victim of the offense is a peace officer or an investigator of the bureau of criminal identification and investigation, a firefighter, or a person performing emergency medical service, while in the performance of the officer’s, investigator’s, firefighter’s, or person’s official duties.
Established Case Law – Assault and Physical Harm
This Court has previously held, “no showing of actual trauma or injury is needed to satisfy the ‘physical harm’ element of assault. The qualification of the physical contact as ‘physical harm’ is a matter to be determined by the trier of fact.” In re G.K., 2022-Ohio-2124, p. 19. “The slightest injury is enough proof of physical harm.” State v. Bailey, 2023-Ohio-1267, ¶ 20, citing State v. Hustead, 83 Ohio App.3d 809, 615 N.E.2d 1081 (4th Dist. 1992).1
This Court will examine the evidence admitted at trial, view that evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution and determine if any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of O.R.C. §2903.13(A)(C)(5)(a). This Court will then determine whether such evidence, if believed, would convince the average mind of the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Mr. Culbertson Argues that Sgt. Jones Annoyed and Egged Mr. Culbertson
Mr. Culbertson argues that the evidence “shows that Mr. Culbertson annoyed Sergeant Sgt. Jones, Sgt. Jones egged him on, and so Mr. Culbertson touched his face.” We disagree.
Evidence
The evidence produced by the State during their case in chief consisted of testimony from Sgt. Jones and Officer Binkley, three video clips from the patrolmen’s body cameras and three photos of Sgt. Jones’ eye.
Did Mr. Culbertson Touch or Slap Sgt. Jones?
Officer Binkley witnessed the interaction between Mr. Culbertson and Sgt. Jones and testified, “[I]t looked like the Defendant slapped Sergeant Sgt. Jones across the left side of his face with his right hand.” Defense counsel attempts to get Officer Binkley to describe the “slap” as a “touch” but Officer Binkley responds, “I couldn’t attest to that.” Sgt. Jones described the contact, “He used force with his open palm to strike me on the side of my face.” “It was enough to cause injury.”
Defense counsel, after viewing one of the videos, described the contact to Sgt. Jones’ face, “I saw your head move a little bit, but it wasn’t like whipping around to the side, correct?”
How Sgt. Jones Described the Interaction
Sgt. Jones described the altercation that ensued between he and Mr. Culbertson following the contact to his face. Sgt. Jones stated that Mr. Culbertson, “[A]ttempted to grab me around the neck, threw several punches.” Sgt. Jones sprained his back during the scuffle with Mr. Culbertson and had to go to the emergency room for treatment. Sgt. Jones described State’s Exhibit 3A, the photo of his left eye. “You can see it’s still watering, there’s redness, and starting to bruise on the corner of my eye.”
Trial Court Ruling
The trial court ruled that the State met its burden of proving that Mr. Culbertson knowingly caused or attempted to cause physical harm to Sgt. Jones and that he was guilty of assault.
[T]he State has provided competent credible evidence to prove that Mr. Culbertson caused injury to Sgt. Jones.
This Court has weighed the evidence and finds that the State has provided competent credible evidence to prove that Mr. Culbertson caused injury to Sgt. Jones as defined in the assault statue.
Conclusion and Holding
This Court has viewed the evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution and finds that any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of assault were proven by the State beyond a reasonable doubt.
For the foregoing reasons, Mr. Culbertson’s second and third assignments of error are overruled.
For the reasons stated in our accompanying Opinion, the judgment of the Stark County Court of Common Pleas is Affirmed.
Information for this article was obtained from State v. Culbertson, 2026 – Ohio – 333.
State v. Culbertson, 2026 – Ohio – 333 was issued on February 2, 2026 by the Fifth District Appellate Court and is binding in the following Ohio Counties: Ashland, Coshocton, Delaware, Fairfield, Guernsey, Holmes, Knox, Licking, Morgan, Morrow, Muskingum, Perry, Richland, Stark and Tuscarawas.
Lessons Learned
- Is Physical Harm Required to Convict a Defendant for Assault on a Police Officer? No. Mr. Culbertson appealed his conviction for Assault on a Police Officer stating “Mr. Culbertson argues in his third assignment of error that the officers’ testimony demonstrates that while touching may have occurred, there was no physical harm let alone an attempt to cause physical harm; therefore, the State failed to present sufficient evidence to sustain his conviction.”. There is established case law that has held physical harm is not an element to convict a suspect of Assault. On June 21, 2022 the Fifth District Appellate Court held “[N]o showing of actual trauma or injury is needed to satisfy the ‘physical harm’ element of assault. The qualification of the physical contact as ‘physical harm’ is a matter to be determined by the trier of fact.” In re G.K., 2022-Ohio-2124. Here, although Sgt. Jones did not suffer substantial trauma from the slap, that fact – central to Mr. Culbertson’s argument – does not inhibit the successful prosecution and conviction of Mr. Culbertson for Assault on a Police Officer.
- Did Mr. Culbertson have Intent to Harm Sgt. Jones? Upon arrival at the Towne Tavern, Mr. Culbertson ‘threatened to slap the shit out of Sgt. Jones and rip his fucking face off.”. Despite this statement, the defense attempted to downplay the conduct, characterizing Mr. Culbertson as “a drunk fool” and arguing that the video showed no slap. But Mr. Culbertson’s own words and actions go well beyond mere intoxicated behavior—they reflect a clear intent to cause harm.
- Pre-Sent Arms! Alliance Police Sergeant Michael Jones, Officer Jesse Binkley and the Stark County Prosecutor should be highly commended for the investigation, conviction and successful appeal defense of Mr. Culbertson. Well done!
Does your agency train on Assault on a Police Officer?
Don’t fail your training.
Don’t let your training fail you!
Be safe, smart and objectively reasonable!