A recent decision by the Ninth Judicial District Court of Appeals has upheld a lower court’s ruling that found a local man guilty of domestic violence, concluding that there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction. The case centered on whether the relationship between the defendant and the alleged victim met legal definitions required for a domestic violence charge.
The appeal was filed by Clifford Atkinson in Summit County after he was convicted in Akron Municipal Court. The City of Akron was named as appellee in this matter, with Judge Stevenson issuing the appellate decision dated April 22, 2026.
According to court documents, Mr. Atkinson faced charges stemming from an incident on May 28, 2022. He was charged with one count of domestic violence under Akron City Code 135.16(A) and one count of resisting arrest under Akron City Code 136.13. Both were initially first-degree misdemeanors, though the resisting arrest charge was later amended to a second-degree misdemeanor at the request of city prosecutors. Mr. Atkinson pleaded not guilty and proceeded to jury trial.
Testimony during trial included statements from L.H., who described her relationship with Mr. Atkinson as both romantic and intimate following their reconnection several years prior to the incident. She testified that Mr. Atkinson stayed at her home for “about [a] couple months” while she helped him get back on his feet by driving him to work and appointments and providing shelter. L.H. said their relationship ended in May 2022 after she determined Mr. Atkinson could not “hold [his] own weight.” On May 28, after sharing a meal together, L.H. drove Mr. Atkinson home; she recounted that he took her car keys and cell phones before exiting her vehicle when she refused further conversation.
L.H.’s testimony detailed that after seeking help from neighbors due to losing access to her keys and phones, Mr. Atkinson grabbed her and began choking her until a neighbor intervened by yelling at him, prompting him to stop. She reported difficulty breathing during this altercation and noted that he scratched her neck badly enough to cause bleeding.
Officer Matthew Ritzinger of Akron Police responded to a related 911 call reporting “a male beating a female.” He observed injuries consistent with L.H.’s account: scratch marks and blood visible on her neck’s right side. Officer Ritzinger’s body-worn camera footage was played for jurors; it showed visible scratches and blood on L.H., who told police that she had lived with Mr. Atkinson “for like a month or so” previously as boyfriend/girlfriend.
Mr. Atkinson did not present any witnesses or testify in his defense during trial proceedings.
The jury ultimately found Mr. Atkinson guilty on both counts: domestic violence and resisting arrest. Following a pretrial investigation regarding sentencing for domestic violence, the court sentenced him to 180 days in jail (with 164 days suspended), credited him for 16 days served, ordered six months probation including anger management requirements, mandated compliance with Portage Path services, imposed fines and costs, and issued an order prohibiting contact with L.H.
On appeal, Mr. Atkinson argued there was insufficient evidence supporting his conviction for domestic violence—specifically challenging whether L.H.’s status qualified as “family or household member” under Akron City Code 135.16(A). The appellate court reviewed relevant code sections defining such relationships as including spouses or persons living as spouses within five years prior to an alleged offense if they have cohabitated with the offender.
Citing precedent from State v. Williams (1997), which clarified factors establishing cohabitation such as shared responsibilities or consortium rather than strictly shared addresses, Judge Stevenson wrote: “Viewing this testimony in the light most favorable to the prosecution as required, it is sufficient to establish that L.H. and Mr. Atkinson were ‘family or household member[s].’”
The court concluded there was enough evidence for jurors to reasonably find all elements of domestic violence proven beyond reasonable doubt under city code provisions mirroring state law standards: “We conclude that there is sufficient evidence upon which a jury could reasonably conclude that all elements of domestic violence in violation of Akron City Code 135.16(A) were established beyond a reasonable doubt.”
Accordingly, Mr. Atkinson’s assignment of error was overruled and his conviction affirmed by Judges Stevenson, Carr (Presiding Judge), and Flagg Lanzinger concurring.
Legal representation listed includes John Chapman for appellant Clifford Atkinson; Brian T. Angelonti (Director of Law) and Jacquenette S. Corgan (Assistant Director of Law) represented appellee City of Akron in case numbers C.A Nos 31383/31384.
Source: 2026Ohio1441_City_of_Akron_v_Atkinson_Opinion_Ohio_Court_of_Appeals.pdf
