COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA NO. 69670 CITY OF BEDFORD HEIGHTS : : Plaintiff-Appellee : : JOURNAL ENTRY -vs- : AND : OPINION DEWAYNE WILLIAMS : : Defendant-Appellant : : DATE OF ANNOUNCEMENT OF DECISION: JUNE 6, 1996 CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: CRIMINAL APPEAL FROM THE BEDFORD MUNICIPAL COURT CASE NO. 93-CRB-2057 JUDGMENT: AFFIRMED. DATE OF JOURNALIZATION: APPEARANCES: For Plaintiff-Appellee: JAMES L. OAKAR (#0006972) DAVID J. FINNERTY (#0058520) 700 West St. Clair Ave., Suite 210 Cleveland, Ohio 44113 For Defendant-Appellant: WESLEY A. DUMAS, SR. (0009004) 1711 Superior Building 815 Superior Avenue, N.E. Cleveland, Ohio 44114 - 2 - SPELLACY, C.J.: Defendant-appellant DeWayne Williams ("appellant") appeals his conviction for assault. Appellant assigns the following error for review: THE COURT COMMITTED PREJUDICIAL ERROR BY GIVING AN INCOMPLETE JURY INSTRUCTION ON SELF DEFENSE. Finding the appeal to lack merit, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed. I. Appellant was charged with assaulting Celestine Mills and came to trial in the Bedford Municipal Court. Mills testified she had been acquainted with appellant for some time before she encountered him at the Colson Lounge in Shaker Heights in July of 1993. The two began dating. On September 23, 1993, Mills met appellant at Colson's. Mills told him she would come over to his house later to finish repairing his driveway. Mills arrived at appellant's home at about 9:10 p.m. After letting him know she was there, Mills went outside to work on the driveway. She completed her task twenty to twenty-five minutes later and went inside the house. Appellant told her to heat some spaghetti for herself. After warming the spaghetti, Mills noticed appellant was sitting in an awkward position on the couch. She told appellant he needed to go to bed or sit up. Appellant then stood up and, without saying anything, began striking Mills. He hit her multiple blows to the head until Mills put her hands up to - 3 - protect her eyes. Appellant struck her in the ribs until Mills fell to the floor. Appellant kicked her several times as she lay on the floor. Mills managed to open a bleach bottle which was on the kitchen floor. She flung the bleach at appellant. Mills continued to throw the bleach until the bottle was emptied. The bleach was on everything. Appellant did not strike Mills after she began throwing the bleach. He went to the sink and washed the bleach out of his eyes. Appellant returned to where Mills lay on the floor and asked her why she threw the bleach. He acted as if nothing had happened. Mills asked appellant to call an ambulance but he refused saying Mills did not need one. Mills tried to leave the house but could not move. Appellant finally picked up Mills' belongings and dragged her out the front door. He shoved Mills into her automo- bile and she was able to drive away. Mills testified she suffered injuries to both sides of her head, jawline, neck, had a couple of cracked ribs, bruises and contusions. She missed two months of work. Mills went to the hospital on September 29, 1993, for treatment for her injuries. Appellant testified he met Mills approximately one month before the incident. Mills telephoned appellant the next day and they began seeing each other. He considered their relationship to be sexual in nature only. - 4 - On September 23, 1993, appellant testified he arrived at Colson's Lounge between 4:00 and 4:30 p.m. He had worked a double shift of sixteen hours that day. Mills arrived shortly after appellant who told Mills he did not want to see her that night because he was tired. Appellant stayed at the bar for thirty to forty-five minutes before going home. Appellant fell asleep on the couch. He awoke later, about 11:00 p.m., and heard someone in the driveway. Appellant looked out his window and saw Mills repairing the driveway. He laid back down. Mills knocked on the door and asked to use the bathroom. After coming inside, Mills talked about eating something. Appellant told her to have some spaghetti. Appellant fell back asleep but awoke when Mills began pulling at him in an effort to get appellant to get up and go to bed. Appellant told Mills to leave and shut his eyes again. Mills left the room for a few minutes. Appellant felt something wet hit him in the face. His eyes began burning and he could not see. Mills was throwing bleach on him. Appellant tried to go into the kitchen to put water on his eyes. After washing his eyes out, he grabbed at Mills to try to get the bleach bottle. Appellant stated he was waiving his arms around to try and find his way to the sink. He did not know if he touched Mills. Appellant did not remember touching her but might have when trying to grab the bleach bottle. - 5 - II. In his assignment of error, appellant contends the trial court erred by not giving a complete jury instruction on self-defense. He argues the charge given was too narrow and did not provide the jury with sufficient information to consider the elements of self- defense. Appellant requested the trial court charge the jury with self- defense. The trial court agreed to give the instruction as to self-defense--less than deadly force. After the instructions were given to the jury, appellant's attorney reminded the trial court to inform the jury that if appellant met the burden of self-defense, appellant should be found not guilty. The trial court complied. Then after some further instructions, the trial court asked if there was anything else. Appellant made no objection to the charge. Crim.R. 30(A) provides that a party may file written requests that the court give instructions on the law as found in the re- quest. A party waives the giving or failure to give any instruc- tions unless that party objects before the jury deliberates. The objection must be specific as to the matter objected to and the grounds of the objection. Any claim of error relative to a jury instruction is waived unless, but for the error, the outcome of the trial clearly would have been otherwise. State v. Underwood (1983), 3 Ohio St.3d 12, syllabus. - 6 - Appellant failed to object to the charge as given by the trial court. There is nothing in the record to show the outcome of the trial would have been different if the trial court added to its instruction on self-defense. Appellant's assignment of error is overruled. Judgment affirmed. - 7 - It is ordered that appellee recover of appellant its costs herein taxed. The court finds there were reasonable grounds for this appeal. It is ordered that a special mandate issue out of this court directing the Bedford Municipal Court to carry this judgment into execution. The defendant's conviction having been affirmed, any bail pending appeal is terminated. Case remanded to the trial court for execution of sentence. A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to Rule 27 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure. JAMES D. SWEENEY, J. and ANN DYKE, J. CONCUR. LEO M. SPELLACY CHIEF JUSTICE N.B. This entry is made pursuant to the third sentence of Rule 22(D), Ohio Rules of Appellate Procedure. This is an announcement of decision (see Rule 26). Ten (10) days from the date hereof this document will be stamped to indicate journalization, at which time .