she had heard noises and felt a presence in her home. {¶16} Appellant testified on his own behalf and denied the allegations. Appellant testified that he had a job and that he was “banging like everyone else” at the residence and that he had a couple of beers and that he spent some time in the garage. {¶17} Appellant stated that he did not know the victims, but he indicated that there was only him and a female at the residence. He testified that the female was the only one who frequently lived at the residence. Appellant testified that he did not “knowingly” commit a sex act but that he and the female would play “tickle[d]ee-ball” and then have sex at the same time, although she denied being present during his testimony. {¶18} During direct examination, the following exchange occurred: {¶19} Q. I’m asking if you are certain that there were not more than two females. {¶20} A. No. {¶21} Q. Did you observe any other females that night? {¶22} A. No. {¶23} Appellant’s defense counsel then raised his concerns about appellant not being allowed to fully explain the situation during direct examination. {¶24} Q. Okay. Well, let me ask you something. Are you telling this jury that during this particular date you were only with [the female]? {¶25} A. Yes. {¶26} Q. I’m asking you did you ever engage in any tickle tattle ball with any other female that night? {¶27} A. No. {¶28} At the conclusion of the testimony, the trial court issued a curative instruction to the  5 jury, “All right, ladies and gentlemen, prior to the recess, I was asking [defense counsel] a question about what he believed was his client’s testimony and he was asking some questions. I want to instruct you as part of this process you cannot assume any facts are true from questions that are asked to a witness. In other words, if you have a question in your mind you should disregard it, and if you have a question in your mind as to what some witness testified to do not assume that testimony is true. It is not, it’s just a process of asking questions to try to either bring out any information that we want or any credibility to that witness.” {¶29} Following a verdict of guilty as to Count 1, aggravated burglary, and not guilty as to Counts 2 and 3, rape, and Counts 4 and 5, sexual battery, the trial court imposed an eight-year prison sentence for aggravated burglary. The trial court did not impose a sentence on Count 5, which was the charge of sexual battery, as it merged with Count 1, aggravated burglary. Appellant now appeals his conviction and sentence. II. {¶30} Appellant’s assignment of error is that his convictions were against the manifest weight of the evidence. We disagree. {¶31} In State v. Wilson, 113 Ohio St.3d 382, 2007-Ohio-2202, at ¶24, the Ohio Supreme Court held: {¶32} In determining whether a criminal conviction is against the manifest weight of the evidence, an appellate court must review the entire record, weigh the evidence and all reasonable inferences, consider the credibility of witnesses and determine whether, in resolving conflicts in the evidence, the trier of fact clearly lost its way and created such a manifest miscarriage of justice that the conviction must be reversed and a new trial ordered.  6 {¶33} An appellate court will overturn a conviction due to the manifest weight of the evidence only in extraordinary circumstances when the evidence presented at trial weighs heavily in favor of acquittal. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d at 387. {¶34} When a defendant argues that his convictions are against the manifest weight of the evidence, this Court is to examine the entire record, “weigh[] the evidence and all reasonable inferences, consider[] the credibility of witnesses and determine[] whether, in resolving conflicts in the evidence, the trier of fact clearly lost its way and created such a manifest miscarriage of justice that the convictions must be reversed and a new trial ordered.” State v. Otten, 33 Ohio App.3d 339, 340 (9th Dist.1986). Further, this Court has recognized: “[t]o reverse a [judgment] on manifest weight grounds, an appellate court must review the entire record, weigh the evidence and all reasonable inferences, consider the credibility of witnesses and determine whether, in resolving conflicts in the evidence, the trier of fact clearly lost its way and created a manifest miscarriage of justice.” State v. Morgan, 9th Dist. No. 25441, 2011-Ohio-1035, at ¶36, citing State v. Otten, 33 Ohio App.3d 339, 340 (9th Dist.1986). {¶35} Upon review of the record, we cannot say that this is an “‘exceptional case in which the evidence weighs heavily against the conviction.’” Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d at 387, quoting State v. Martin, 20 Ohio App.3d 172, 175 (1st Dist.1983). Appellant and the female were the only two people present at the residence when the sexual assault occurred. This coupled with his testimony, in which he maintained that the sexual conduct between him and the female occurred solely in the garage, and the victim’s testimony, who indicated that appellant was the only person who engaged in sex acts with her, supports the trial court’s conclusion that appellant committed the offenses. Therefore, we cannot conclude that this is an exceptional case.  7 {¶36} Consequently, the second assignment of error is overruled. III. {¶37} Appellant’s assignments of error are overruled. The judgment of the Summit County Court of Common Pleas is affirmed. Judgment affirmed. There were reasonable grounds for this appeal. We order that a special mandate issue out of this Court, directing the Court of Common Pleas, County of Summit, State of Ohio, to carry this judgment into execution. A certified copy of this journal entry shall constitute the mandate, pursuant to App.R. 27. Immediately upon the filing hereof, this document shall constitute the journal entry of judgment, and it shall be file stamped by the Clerk of the Court of Appeals at which time the period for review shall begin to run. App.R. 22(C). The Clerk of the Court of Appeals is instructed to mail a notice of entry of this judgment to the parties and to make a notation of the mailing in the docket, pursuant to App.R. 30. Costs taxed to Appellant. CARLA MOORE FOR THE COURT WHITMORE, P. J. HENSAL, J. CONCUR. [Cite as State v. Brown, 2013-Ohio-3896.]  8 APPEARANCES: KENNETH A. ROCCO, Attorney at Law, for Appellant. SHERRI BEVAN WALSH, Prosecuting Attorney, and HEAVEN DIMARTINO, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for Appellee. [Cite as State v. Brown, 2013-Ohio-3896.]