State v. Pitts
CourtOhio Court of Appeals
Date FiledJune 18, 2026
DocketC-250584
JudgeZayas
StatusPublished
📰 News Coverage: Read the LAWS.com news report on this case
Full Opinion
[Cite as State v. Pitts, 2026-Ohio-2306.]
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO
HAMILTON COUNTY, OHIO
STATE OF OHIO, : APPEAL NO. C-250584
TRIAL NO. 25/CRB/12997/A
Plaintiff-Appellee, :
vs. :
SARAH R. PITTS, : JUDGMENT ENTRY
Defendant-Appellant. :
This cause was heard upon the appeal, the record, and the briefs.
For the reasons set forth in the Opinion filed this date, the judgment of the trial
court is affirmed.
Further, the court holds that there were reasonable grounds for this appeal,
allows no penalty, and orders that costs be taxed under App.R. 24.
The court further orders that (1) a copy of this Judgment with a copy of the
Opinion attached constitutes the mandate, and (2) the mandate be sent to the trial
court for execution under App.R. 27.
To the clerk:
Enter upon the journal of the court on 6/18/2026 per order of the court.
By:_______________________
Administrative Judge
[Cite as State v. Pitts, 2026-Ohio-2306.]
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO
HAMILTON COUNTY, OHIO
STATE OF OHIO, : APPEAL NO. C-250584
TRIAL NO. 25/CRB/12997/A
Plaintiff-Appellee, :
vs. :
OPINION
SARAH R. PITTS, :
Defendant-Appellant. :
Criminal Appeal From: Hamilton County Municipal Court
Judgment Appealed From Is: Affirmed
Date of Judgment Entry on Appeal: June 18, 2026
Emily Smart Woerner, City Solicitor, Susan Zurface, Chief Prosecuting Attorney, and
Meagan W. Myers, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for Plaintiff-Appellee,
Raymond T. Faller, Hamilton County Public Defender, and Lora Peters, Assistant
Public Defender, for Defendant-Appellant.
[Cite as State v. Pitts, 2026-Ohio-2306.]
ZAYAS, Presiding Judge.
{¶1} Sarah R. Pitts appeals her conviction, after a bench trial, for assault. In
one assignment of error, Pitts argues that the trial court erred in convicting her of
assault as she acted in self-defense. For the following reasons, we affirm the judgment
of the trial court.
Factual Background
{¶2} Sarah R. Pitts was charged with assault, menacing, and domestic
violence after an altercation with her former girlfriend R.N. and R.N.’s new girlfriend.
Pitts pled not guilty and proceeded to a bench trial.
{¶3} The new girlfriend testified that she had met R.N. on Facebook in May.
After speaking for a week on Facebook, they decided to meet. After their first meeting,
they began to date. On July 29, to celebrate R.N.’s birthday, the new girlfriend
purchased gifts and a cake to surprise her. After a celebratory dinner, they returned
to R.N.’s home to Facetime R.N.’s sister, sing “Happy Birthday,” and enjoy the cake.
{¶4} They retired to the bedroom and sat on the bed talking. While on the
phone with her father around 10 p.m., R.N. received a phone-camera notification that
Pitts had walked up to her front door and knocked. When R.N. walked out of the
bedroom, leaving the new girlfriend on the bed, Pitts walked up the stairs and came
into the bedroom. The bed was facing the door, and the new girlfriend was lying on
the left side of the bed.
{¶5} The new girlfriend described Pitts as physically and verbally aggressive.
Pitts was yelling at her, demanding she leave the home, and coming toward her. Pitts
called her the “B-word” and told her to get out of her house. Pitts grabbed a tall,
standing metal fan that was on the left side of the bed. The new girlfriend estimated
that the fan weighed 35-40 pounds. Pitts swung the fan at her, and the new girlfriend
OHIO FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS
blocked it with her right forearm and hand. She felt throbbing pain from the impact
and had to ice her arm and hand that night. The new girlfriend also took ibuprofen to
calm the pain.
{¶6} At that point, the new girlfriend was in defense mode. She kicked Pitts
who continued to move aggressively toward her. R.N. tried to grab the fan away from
Pitts and hold her down. Pitts got up and grabbed a lamp from the nightstand next to
the new girlfriend. R.N. managed to take the lamp from Pitts and pin her down. R.N.
told the new girlfriend to go downstairs and go outside.
{¶7} The new girlfriend went onto the right side of the bed, grabbed her
phone, and called the police. While walking down the stairs, the new girlfriend was
talking to the police. She told the police that both she and R.N. were in danger, and
that R.N. was trying to calm Pitts. The police instructed her to walk outside if she did
not feel safe, and she followed their instructions.
{¶8} When the new girlfriend awoke the next day, she had a bruise on her left
knee, which she photographed. She also had scratches on her neck that occurred when
she was defending herself from Pitts’s attack. Pitts had attempted to grab her face,
and when the new girlfriend backed up, Pitts scratched her neck. The new girlfriend
testified that she felt a burning sensation from the scratches that hurt. She treated the
scratches with ointment. The State submitted a photo of the scratches on her neck.
The new girlfriend confirmed that Pitts hit her with the fan before she kicked Pitts.
{¶9} R.N. testified that after returning home from dinner, she and the new
girlfriend ate the birthday cake, and her mom and sister sang “Happy Birthday” to her.
They went upstairs, and R.N. was on the phone with her father when she saw Pitts
come to her front door through her camera. Pitts went to the back of the house and
opened the back door. Pitts had been there earlier, and at that time, R.N. had asked
4
OHIO FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS
the new girlfriend if she had locked the back door. The new girlfriend said yes, but
hesitated, so R.N. was going to go check to ensure the door was locked, but she forgot.
{¶10} While still on the phone, R.N. set her cake down and went to the stairs.
By the time she got there, Pitts was there. The new girlfriend was still sitting on the
bed when Pitts came in and told her to “get this B out of my house.” Pitts kept
repeating it, and R.N. did not know what to do. The house belonged to R.N., and she
lived there with her two dogs. R.N. had allowed Pitts to have her mail sent to R.N.’s
house and leave some of her belongings there because Pitts was a traveling nurse and
was always gone. R.N. had had an on-and-off relationship with Pitts for the past three
years. When asked if the two were currently dating, R.N. responded, “It depends on
how we feel, what – you know.”
{¶11} Pitts continued to demand that the new girlfriend leave the home, and
the new girlfriend said that Pitts was no longer dating R.N. Pitts started walking
toward the new girlfriend, who leaned back and started kicking. Pitts picked up a fan
and tried to hit the new girlfriend with it. Pitts tried to reach the new girlfriend, and
the new girlfriend tried to grab the fan. R.N. pushed Pitts onto the futon and fell on
top of her. R.N. told the new girlfriend to go downstairs, and the new girlfriend called
the police. R.N. and Pitts stayed in the bedroom for about ten-15 minutes then went
out the back door.
{¶12} R.N. gave a statement to the officers that night, and the statement was
admitted as an exhibit. R.N. was confronted with the fact that her testimony did not
match her statement because she told the police that Pitts swung the fan before the
new girlfriend began kicking. R.N. responded that she did not write the action word-
for-word how it actually happened. She further explained that her sister and neighbor
were “in her face” and she had anxiety that night.
5
OHIO FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS
{¶13} The State sought permission to treat her as a hostile witness, which the
court allowed. R.N.’s statement said,
I, [R.N.] saw [Pitts] open up a side door and enter my house.
[Pitts] came up my stairs and attacked [the new girlfriend], punching
her and then picked up a fan and then tried to hit [the new girlfriend] in
the head. I, [R.N.] grabbed her to stop. [Pitts] then picked up my lamp
and swung the lamp at [the new girlfriend’s] head. I, [R.N.] grabbed
[Pitts] so that [the new girlfriend] could get out through. [Pitts] then
left out of the room and went outside. I told [the new girlfriend] to get
out of the house.
{¶14} R.N. confirmed that she wrote the statement, but she was “dumbing it
down” and there was so much going on. When asked whether a complaint was filed
against Pitts for domestic violence and menacing for threatening to beat R.N.’s ass,
causing R.N. to believe Pitts would cause her physical harm, R.N. responded, “No, I
don’t remember that.”
{¶15} On cross-examination, R.N. testified that Pitts “didn’t really get to
punch” the new girlfriend, and “didn’t get a connect” and “she didn’t really-she didn’t
make contact with [the new girlfriend’s] face, not no fist balled up that I seen.” When
asked who struck whom first, R.N. replied, “[The new girlfriend] leaned back on the
bed and started kicking her legs.” That’s when R.N. saw Pitts pick up the fan, and R.N.
knocked the fan out of Pitts’s hand. R.N. said that Pitts sometimes stayed with her
when she was in town. When R.N. gets mad at her they break up and then when she
is back in town, they may make up.
{¶16} The court asked R.N. what Pitts did to cause the new girlfriend to start
kicking. R.N. stated that Pitts was rapidly advancing on her and telling her to “get out
6
OHIO FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS
of my house.” R.N. testified that Pitts was mad and aggressive. Pitts approached the
new girlfriend after she reminded Pitts that she was no longer dating R.N.
{¶17} The responding officer testified he responded to a domestic-violence
call. The new girlfriend was shaken like she had just been in a fight. She was wearing
a black nightie and holding her right arm as though it were tender. The officer took a
photo of her neck. After the officer took the new girlfriend’s statement, R.N. came out
of the house, and the officers separated the two to get both statements. He spoke with
R.N.
{¶18} When he asked R.N. what happened, her initial statement was,
“Whatever [the new girlfriend] said.” R.N. had not heard what the new girlfriend had
said, so the officer sought a more concrete statement. After the officer explained that
R.N. told him that Pitts picked up a big, metal fan, Pitts objected to any hearsay
statements, which the court sustained.
{¶19} Twice during the police investigation, Pitts called R.N. The officers
instructed R.N. not to tell Pitts that the police were there and asked R.N. to put Pitts
on speaker phone. A voice that R.N. referred to as Pitts repeatedly said, “I will beat
your ass.” Based on R.N.’s statements, the officer decided to arrest Pitts for domestic
violence and menacing. The assault charge was based on the new girlfriend’s
statement about the fan, the complaint of pain, and the scrape on her neck.
{¶20} Based on Pitts’s phone statements, the officers believed she was still in
the area, so they drove around the area. They located her vehicle, which was illegally
parked, so the officers initiated a tow. As they were driving to file the charges, they
saw Pitts speaking with R.N. Pitts was verbally combative.
{¶21} The State rested, and the trial court granted Pitts’s motion to dismiss
the menacing and domestic-violence charges for lack of evidence.
7
OHIO FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS
{¶22} Pitts testified that she texted R.N. “Happy Birthday” and told her that
she loved her. R.N. responded, “I love you too.” Pitts decided to call R.N., and when
R.N. did not answer, Pitts went to her home. The key fob on the front door was dead,
so Pitts went to the backyard, and the door was unlocked. She walked in and went
upstairs. R.N. met her at the bedroom door, and they went into the bedroom. Initially,
she did not see the new girlfriend. When she did, she told R.N. to “get this bitch out
of my house.” Pitts was hurt and angry because she had no idea R.N. was dating
someone. She continued to tell R.N. to get her out of the house when the new girlfriend
stood up and said, “You all not even together.” Pitts responded, “Listen [new
girlfriend], I am not talking to you. I am talking to [R.N.].”
{¶23} As she walked toward the bed, the new girlfriend kicked her. After the
new girlfriend starting kicking her, Pitts tried to hit her with the fan, but R.N. stepped
in between the two and took the fan. Then Pitts picked up the lamp and hit the new
girlfriend with the lamp. R.N. took the lamp and threw it down then pushed her back
and held her down. The new girlfriend went downstairs.
{¶24} On cross-examination, Pitts testified that she had been living with R.N.,
but was now homeless. Pitts acknowledged R.N. owned the home, and that she was
not living with R.N. at the time, but she would go there. Pitts and R.N. had separated
in May. Currently, they were back together. Pitts was surprised and hurt to find
another person in the bedroom and had a verbal altercation with R.N. Pitts admitted
picking up the fan, but she denied hitting the new girlfriend with it. Pitts wished she
had hit her because the new girlfriend kicked her.
{¶25} The trial court found that Pitts was advancing on the new girlfriend, and
the new girlfriend acted in self-defense. The court further found “objective evidence
of injury to [the new girlfriend],” and found Pitts guilty.
8
OHIO FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS
{¶26} Pitts now appeals, and in one assignment of error, she argues that the
trial court erred in finding her guilty because she acted in self-defense.
Self-defense
{¶27} A claim that the State failed to disprove self-defense is reviewed under
the manifest-weight standard. State v. Nichols, 2025-Ohio-1515, ¶ 18 (1st Dist.), citing
State v. Mitchell, 2023-Ohio-2604, ¶ 13 (1st Dist.); State v. Smiley, 2025-Ohio-2666,
¶ 19 (5th Dist.). In reviewing a manifest-weight challenge, an appellate court reviews
the entire record, weighs the evidence and all of the reasonable inferences, considers
the credibility of witnesses, and determines whether in resolving conflicts in the
evidence, the factfinder “clearly lost its way and created such a manifest miscarriage
of justice that the conviction must be reversed and a new trial ordered.” State v.
Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380, 387 (1997). “When confronted with conflicting
evidence, we interpret the evidence in a manner consistent with the trial court’s
judgment.” State v. Rose, 2024-Ohio-5689, ¶ 23 (1st Dist.), citing In re J.C., 2019-
Ohio-4027, ¶ 20 (1st Dist.).
{¶28} Assault in violation of R.C. 2903.13(A) occurs where a person
“knowingly cause[s] or attempt[s] to cause physical harm to another. . . .” R.C.
2903.13(A). The State also had the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that
the accused did not act in self-defense. See R.C. 2901.05(B)(1).
{¶29} In a case involving the use of nondeadly force, an accused is justified in
using force against another if (1) she was not at fault in creating the situation giving
rise to the altercation and (2) she had reasonable grounds to believe and an honest
belief, even though mistaken, that she was in imminent danger of bodily harm and her
only means to protect herself from the danger was by the use of force not likely to cause
death or great bodily harm. See State v. Ridley, 2022-Ohio-2561, ¶ 15 (1st Dist.).
9
OHIO FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS
{¶30} The State need only disprove one of the elements of self-defense, beyond
a reasonable doubt at trial, to sustain its burden. State v. Smith, 2026-Ohio-1262, ¶
39 (1st Dist.), citing Nichols, 2025-Ohio-1515, at ¶ 25 (1st Dist.). “A person may not
provoke an assault or voluntarily enter an encounter and then claim a right of self-
defense.” Nichols at ¶ 25. An initial aggressor can be the person whose wrongful
behavior provoked the assault. See Rose, 2024-Ohio-5689, at ¶ 28 (1st Dist.). An
accused is “at fault” in causing the altercation if she knowingly and voluntarily enters
a place or situation where a victim is located, or if she refuses to leave such a space.
State v. Patterson, 2025-Ohio-280, ¶ 41 (10th Dist.), citing State v. Ellis, 2012-Ohio-
3586, ¶ 15 (10th Dist.); State v. Walker, 2021-Ohio-2037, ¶ 19 (8th Dist.) (“Generally,
a defendant, having willingly advanced toward a volatile situation cannot rely on the
affirmative defense of self-defense.”).
{¶31} Pitts argues that the court erred in finding her guilty because both R.N.
and Pitts testified that the new girlfriend kicked Pitts first, and therefore, was the
initial aggressor.
{¶32} Here, all of the witnesses who were present during the altercation
testified that Pitts entered the home through an unlocked door and proceeded upstairs
and into R.N.’s bedroom. All agreed that Pitts was angry and aggressive, repeatedly
stated, “get this B out of my house,” and approached the new girlfriend who was in
R.N.’s bed.
{¶33} The new girlfriend testified that Pitts approached her and grabbed a
heavy metal fan and began swinging it toward her, and both R.N. and Pitts gave similar
testimony. The new girlfriend testified that she blocked the fan with her arm, suffering
an injury, while R.N. and Pitts claimed that Pitts was unable to strike the new girlfriend
with the fan. However, the first responding officer testified that when he arrived, the
10
OHIO FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS
new girlfriend was holding her right arm as though it were tender. He further testified
that the new girlfriend had scrapes on her neck which he photographed. On the night
of the altercation, R.N. admitted that Pitts attacked the new girlfriend, punched her,
and then picked up a fan and tried to hit her in the head.
{¶34} Based on this record, the trial court did not err in finding that Pitts was
the initial aggressor, who advanced on the victim. “[A] defendant voluntarily
participating in or initiating a confrontation, especially for purposes other than
protection, cannot justify or excuse” her use of force. See Rose, 2024-Ohio-5689, at ¶
28 (1st Dist.), quoting State v. Smith, 2021-Ohio-1185, ¶ 23 (8th Dist.).
{¶35} Moreover, “[s]elf-defense cases often come down to witness credibility.”
Nichols, 2025-Ohio-1515, at ¶ 27 (1st Dist.). Here, the trial court found that the new
girlfriend acted in self-defense and suffered an injury, based on the photographic
evidence. The trial court found the new girlfriend’s testimony to be credible.
{¶36} Accordingly, we overrule the first assignment of error.
Conclusion
{¶37} Having overruled Pitts’s sole assignment of error, we affirm the
judgment of the trial court.
Judgment affirmed.
NESTOR and MOORE, JJ., concur.
11