On March 11, 2014, a jury convicted Myah Evans Batie of domestic violence in violation of R.C. 2919.25(A) with a prior conviction specification. The charge arose out of a physical altercation between Batie and her husband, where the husband called 911 for assistance. Batie appealed. The Ohio Court of Appeals affirmed.

Facts

[On direct examination, Officer Todd Simpson testified as follows at Myah Evans Batie’s trial:]

Q. And when you respond to a domestic violence call, is it your duty to determine who is the primary physical aggressor?

A. Yes, it is.

Q. Based on your conversation in speaking with the victim . . . outside, in speaking with the defendant inside, your observations, what did you conclude?

A. The observations of the evidence proved that Miss Batie—

Defense Counsel: Objection.

The Court: Overruled.

A. Miss Evans started the disturbance, continued and assaulted and injured her husband.

Q. And what was your basis for coming to that conclusion?

A. His bruising obviously on his face, the scratches, bite marks on his arm, and I think his leg.......

1. List all the facts relevant to deciding whether Myah Batie was the initial aggressor.

2. Summarize the court’s arguments to support its decision.

3. According to the court, what’s the difference between a “primary physical aggressor” and an “initial aggressor”?

4. Do you agree that Myah Batie was the original or primary aggressor? Defend your answer.

5. Explain how the court found Myah the primary aggressor, and therefore her husband was not guilty. Do you agree? Defend your answer.