## Facts

- Douglas Rawson and Greg Metcalf were at the same restaurant/bar.
- While waiting to use the restroom, Metcalf spoke with a woman who was waiting with Rawson’s wife near the ladies’ room.
- Rawson followed Metcalf into the men’s restroom.
- Metcalf suffered severe facial injuries and emerged covered in blood, with a broken nose and damaged teeth.
- Metcalf testified that a man entered the restroom and struck him in the face.
- Other witnesses testified they saw Metcalf crawl out of the restroom while Rawson was kicking him.
- Rawson testified he mistook Metcalf for one of his stepdaughter’s male friends who would jokingly flirt with Rawson’s wife.
- According to Rawson, he slammed the restroom door open, struck a partition, said something like, “What are you doin’ hitting on my old lady,” and pushed Metcalf; when he realized Metcalf was not the person he thought, he turned to leave.
- Rawson testified Metcalf then hit Rawson, Rawson pushed Metcalf into a wall, Metcalf grabbed him from behind, and the two wrestled; Rawson stated his arm struck something but he did not know what.
- Rawson denied kicking or punching Metcalf.
- Rawson was indicted for felonious assault under Ohio Rev. Code § 2903.11(A)(1).
- At trial, Rawson requested a jury instruction on mistake of fact; the trial court refused, but instructed the jury on the meaning of acting “knowingly.”
- The jury convicted Rawson, and he received a two-year prison sentence.

## Issues

1. Did the trial court commit reversible error by refusing to instruct the jury on mistake of fact when Rawson claimed he misidentified Metcalf, where the court otherwise instructed the jury on the statutory “knowingly” mental state for felonious assault?

## Decision

- The Ohio Seventh District Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction and sentence.
- The court held the trial court did not err by refusing Rawson’s requested mistake-of-fact instruction.
- The court reasoned that the jury instructions defining “knowingly” gave the jury the tools to decide whether Rawson had the required mental state.
- The court concluded Rawson’s alleged mistake—who Metcalf was—did not negate an element of felonious assault, which requires knowingly causing serious physical harm to “another.”

## Legal Principles

- A mistake-of-fact theory matters only if the mistake, if believed, would negate the mental state required for an element of the offense.
- A trial court is not required to give a requested special instruction when the substance of that request is fairly covered by the instructions as a whole.
- For felonious assault under Ohio Rev. Code § 2903.11(A)(1), the state must prove the defendant knowingly caused serious physical harm to another person; the victim’s identity is generally not an element the state must prove.

## Conclusion

The appellate court affirmed Rawson’s felonious-assault conviction because the trial court’s instruction on acting “knowingly” adequately allowed the jury to assess Rawson’s state of mind, and Rawson’s claimed misidentification of the victim did not negate the offense’s required elements.


State v. Rawson, 2006 WL 279003 (2006)