First District Roundup! Friday 11/4

Wooo this week has been BUSY! Just as a friendly reminder, the library will close early next Wednesday for Voting! Be sure to get out there and make your voice heard!

State of Ohio v. Logan Hayden
Quote from Judge WInkler:
In 2020, Hayden was on community control as a sanction for a drugtrafficking offense. His community-control sanctions involved local incarceration at the River City Correctional Center and, upon his release from River City, intensive supervision through Hamilton County’s Adult Probation Department and Electronic Monitoring Unit (“EMU”), which we refer to as probation.
Hayden was successfully discharged from River City and placed on probation on July 17, 2020. Billy Scott, a supervisor at River City whom Hayden had met while incarcerated, allowed Hayden to reside in his home and to use his white 2011 Chevy Malibu during his stay.
Hayden signed forms when he was placed on probation. These forms contained his acknowledgement of, and agreement to, certain rules and conditions of probation, including subjection to certain warrantless searches, wearing an electric monitoring device (“EMD”) with a Global Positioning System (“GPS”) on his ankle, obeying all laws, and staying inside his residence except for limited times and for limited activities.
After Hayden moved into Scott’s home, Hayden’s probation officers closely monitored Hayden’s movements by using GPS mapping technology and by observing him driving the Malibu. The probation officers noticed that Hayden was not abiding by his restricted schedule and had been present for short periods of time in multiple parks and gas stations round the city on the same day, often in the early morning hours, a pattern consistent with drug trafficking. Based on this information, the probation officers decided to visit Hayden’s residence on July 31, 2020, to ensure Hayden was complying with the conditions of his probation.

            The trial court properly overruled defendant’s motion to suppress contraband found in a car defendant drove and cash discovered on his person where defendant’s probation officer had reasonable grounds to suspect defendant was in violation of the law and the terms of his probation and where defendant had agreed to warrantless searches based on reasonable grounds as a condition of his probation
              Defendant’s convictions for multiple drug offenses and the offense of having weapons while under disability were supported by sufficient evidence and were not against the manifest weight of the evidence where, despite evidence that defendant shared the car where probation officers found drugs and a gun, strong circumstantial evidence tied defendant to the contraband, including the presence of $1000 cash in mixed denominations on defendant’s person.
                 The trial court did not err by imposing an indefinite sentence for qualifying offenses where the sentencing scheme embodied in the Reagan Tokes Law is not unconstitutional on its face. 

State of Ohio v. Michael Lykins
Quote from Judge Bock:
On July 8, 2020, Lykins was indicted for two counts of rape in violation of R.C. 2907.02(A) and one count of corrupting another with drugs in violation of R.C. 2925.02(A)(4), against a 13-year-old child.
In August 2020, Lykins sought a competency evaluation and discovery. The trial found Lykins competent to stand trial on October 15, 2020. The state took more than five months to respond to Lykins’s discovery demand.
In November 2020, Lykins filed a pro se motion to dismiss, arguing that his speedy-trial rights had been violated. Lykins was represented by counsel at the time of his pro se filing. Counsel did not join his motion.
Lykins sought 13 continuances during the pendency of his case, each ranging from five to 166 days. Lykins waived time on each request.
On February 2, 2022, the trial court accepted Lykins’s no-contest pleas and found him guilty. The court sentenced Lykins to seven years in the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction and classified him as a Tier III sex offender or child-victim offender.

            The trial court did not err by denying defendant’s pro se motion to dismiss based on a speedy-trial violation where the defendnat was represented by counsel at the time of the filing and counsel did not join in the motion.
          The trial court did not violate defendant’s speedy-trial rights where the trial court accepted defendant’s no-contest pleas and found him within the statutory time limit, and, therefore trial counsel was not ineffective in failing to raise the speedy-trial issue in the trial court.

Tarun Mehta v. Michele Johnson
Quote from Judge Zayas:
Mehta is the owner of a rental unit at 1418 Covedale Avenue. Johnson rented the unit from plaintiff starting in January 2019. On October 15, 2019, Mehta filed a complaint for forcible entry and detainer against Johnson seeking restitution of the premises. Mehta’s complaint also included a second cause of action for damages for unpaid rent, utilities, and physical damage to the premises. On November 7, 2019, Johnson filed an answer and jury demand, and bond was set at $1,000 per month, payable that day and each month thereafter by the fifth day of each month. Subsequently, Johnson tendered her rent bond to the court on November 7 and December 3, 2019, and January 6, February 7, and March 6, 2020.
Mehta filed a motion to strike Johnson’s jury demand on April 20, 2020, asserting that Johnson failed to tender her rent bond for April. The motion was granted by the trial court, and the case was referred to the magistrate’s docket. The magistrate granted Mehta restitution of the premises, and the trial court approved the magistrate’s decision and issued a seven-day writ of restitution on July 28, 2020. Johnson was physically evicted from the premises when the writ was executed on August 11, 2020.

The trial court’s calculation of damages for unpaid rent was not against the manifest weight of the evidence where the evidence showed that the parties agreed to a monthly rental amount and no evidence was presented of any subsequent change in such agreement.     
The trial court’s findings that the tenant was responsible for the water bill and caused damage to the garage door were not against the manifest weight of the evidence where competing testimony was presented on each issue and the trial court made a credibility determination that was best left to the trier of fact.  

State of Ohio v. Ronald R. Ledger
Quote from Judge Bock:
The state indicted Ledger on five counts of illegal use of a minor or impaired person in a nudity-oriented material or performance in violation of R.C. 2907.323(A)(3), and three counts of pandering sexually oriented matters involving a minor in violation of R.C. 2907.322(A)(5).
At a hearing, the trial court began the proceeding with an announcement, “And so, Mr. Ledger, your attorney -- I don’t allow any plea bargains in these cases, so they wanted to try to get you to go along with dropping some charges, but I don’t do that. I don’t make any plea bargains and no promises on these cases.” Following that announcement, Ledger pleaded guilty to all eight felony charges. The court accepted his pleas and found him guilty of the eight felonies. Ledger received an aggregate 90-month sentence with an accompanying Tier II sex
offender designation.

            Defendant did not forfeit a challenge to the trial court’s blanket policy of rejecting plea agreements by failing to submit a plea agreement to the trial court where it would have been futile for defendant to submit a plea agreement to the court after the trial court announced that it would have summarily rejected the plea under its policy.
The trial court abused its discretion when it refused to accept defendant’s plea agreement with the state under a blanket policy of not accepting pleas in “these cases.”

State of Ohio v. Savoz Carter
Quote from Judge Zayas:
Savoz Carter was charged with resisting arrest in violation of R.C. 2921.33(A), for recklessly resisting arrest. Carter pled not guilty and proceeded to a bench trial.
Officer Anthony Dawson testified that while on routine patrol, he saw a vehicle illegally parked in the cul-de-sac of Topridge Street in Winton Terrace. The car was missing license plates, so Dawson ran the VIN number through his computer. The search revealed that the car was stolen, and that Savoz Carter, who was attached to the vehicle, had outstanding warrants, including a felony warrant associated with the car. Carter’s photograph popped up on his computer screen.
Immediately, Dawson requested that dispatch send a tow truck and another police cruiser to assist him. While speaking to dispatch, he saw Carter and a woman walk out of a residence. As Carter approached him, Dawson recognized him from the photo on his computer. Dawson decided to wait for additional officers to arrive before arresting him.

Defendant’s conviction for resisting arrest was supported by sufficient evidence and not against the weight of the evidence where the evidence established that defendant repeatedly refused to follow the officer’s commands to lie on the ground and place his hands behind his back.

State of Ohio v. Anthony Ward
Anthony Ward was charged with aiding and abetting the theft of two transmissions. At trial, Terrence Deters testified that he owned a funeral home at the corner of West 8th Street and Kreis Lane. His home is located between the funeral home and his garage. About a month earlier, a driver had had a medical emergency and crashed through the front of his garage, damaging the back wall of the garage. Until the wall was repaired, Deters had attached caution tape from both corners of the garage to the fence. Deters had two Chrysler 727 Torq Flight automatic transmissions behind the garage.
On September 10th, Deters attended his sister’s funeral. When he returned, the transmissions were gone. Deters had 16 cameras on the property. When he discovered that his transmissions were missing, he reviewed the footage from two cameras located on the corner of the garage. One camera showed a van pulling onto his lot with the license plate clearly visible. The second camera showed a man getting out of the passenger’s seat and putting both transmissions into the van. Both videos were played.

Defendant’s conviction for aiding and abetting theft was supported by sufficient evidence and not against the weight of the evidence where the evidence established that defendant aided and abetted the person who committed the theft by driving the person to the victim’s home, parking close to the garage to facilitate the theft, driving to a scrap yard to sell the stolen items, and accepting payment for driving the vehicle.

State of Ohio v. Larissa Crumpley
The court sua sponte removes this case from the regular calendar and places it on the court’s accelerated calendar, 1st Dist. Loc.R. 11.1.1(A), and this judgment entry is not an opinion of the court. See Rep.Op.R. 3.1; App.R. 11.1(E); 1st Dist. Loc.R. 11.1.1.
Larissa Crumpley pled guilty to felonious assault and was sentenced to an indefinite prison term of five years to seven years and six months. In four assignments of error, Crumpley argues that the Reagan Tokes Law is ripe for review, violates her due-process rights, her right to a jury trial, and the separation-of-powers doctrine.
In her first assignment of error, Crumpley argues that her constitutional challenges are ripe for review. We agree. See State v. Maddox, Slip Opinion No. 2022- Ohio-764, ¶ 11; State v. Guyton, 1st Dist. Hamilton No. C-190657, 2022-Ohio-2962, ¶ We sustain the first assignment of error.