State v. Blanton, 215 N.E.3d 467

Background

Denny Blanton was convicted after separate jury trials of (a) kidnapping and raping a 15‑year‑old (DNA linked him to semen) and (b) felonious assault and kidnapping for a violent jailhouse beating; both convictions were affirmed on direct appeal.
Blanton filed postconviction petitions in both cases alleging ineffective assistance of trial counsel and other constitutional defects (failure to present consent in opening, failure to call/examine experts, withdrawing girlfriend witness, failure to seek venue change, failure to seek judge disqualification, and claims about destroyed jail video and advice about testifying).
The trial court dismissed the petitions largely on res judicata grounds or for failing to allege substantive grounds for relief; the Fourth District affirmed.
Blanton asked the Ohio Supreme Court to overrule State v. Cole and adopt the federal rule from Massaro that ineffective‑assistance claims need not be raised on direct appeal.
The Ohio Supreme Court declined to overrule Cole, explained the two‑part Cole framework (res judicata placement + whether evidence outside the record is required), reviewed each of Blanton’s claims, and affirmed the appellate court’s judgment—finding most claims barred by res judicata or non‑prejudicial even if credited.

Issues

Issue	Blanton's Argument	State's/Respondent's Argument	Held
Applicability of res judicata to postconviction ineffective‑assistance claims	Cole should be overruled; postconviction review should always be available for IAC (Massaro approach)	Cole strikes proper balance; res judicata applies unless claim cannot be meaningfully reviewed without evidence dehors the record	Court adheres to Cole: res judicata bars claims that could fairly be adjudicated on direct appeal; exception if review requires evidence outside trial record
Failure to disclose/argue consent in opening statement	Counsel was ineffective for not telling jury early that Blanton admitted consensual sex to counsel	Claim could and was adequately resolved on the merits; any prejudice speculative	Court: evidence that Blanton told counsel is outside record (so not per se barred), but Blanton failed to show prejudice; claim fails
Failure to call experts (mud on shorts; genital‑injury causation)	Counsel was ineffective for not presenting microscopy or medical‑injury experts to undercut victim’s account	Either claim was adjudicated or, even if outside record, proposed evidence would not establish prejudice	Court: mud‑expert claim was not barred but lacked prejudice; injury‑expert claim relied on outside evidence but did not, as proffered, show a reasonable probability of different outcome
Withdrawing girlfriend witness after announcing intent to call her	Withdrawing was ineffective and prejudicial because jury inferred damaging testimony	The likely testimony was of marginal value and calling her risked impeachment; trial strategy	Court: claim fails—proffered testimony speculative and marginal; counsel’s choice reasonable
Failure to file affidavit of disqualification / move to recuse judge	Counsel should have sought disqualification based on judge’s spouse’s employment with victim’s superintendent	Allegations of bias were in record for rape case (so appealable); mere prior involvement does not establish bias for jail case	Court: for rape case claim is barred by res judicata; for jail case the record lacked recusal motion but proffered facts did not show prejudice or bias sufficient to establish IAC
Destruction/nonpreservation of jail video & counsel absence at dismissal hearing	Missing footage was exculpatory or potentially useful; counsel ineffective for not ensuring Blanton’s presence at hearing	Defense knew of missing footage at trial and raised the issue on appeal; footage not shown to be materially exculpatory or destroyed in bad faith	Court: due‑process claim barred by res judicata (known at trial); even credited proffers do not show material exculpatory value or bad faith; absence at hearing did not establish prejudice

Key Cases Cited

State v. Perry, 10 Ohio St.2d 175 (Ohio 1967) (res judicata bars claims that were or could have been raised at trial or on appeal)
State v. Cole, 2 Ohio St.3d 112 (Ohio 1982) (postconviction IAC claims are not barred by res judicata when adjudication requires evidence outside the trial record)
Massaro v. United States, 538 U.S. 500 (U.S. 2003) (federal rule: IAC claims may be raised in collateral proceedings even if record could have supported direct appeal)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (two‑prong standard for ineffective assistance: deficiency and prejudice)
State v. Milanovich, 42 Ohio St.2d 46 (Ohio 1975) (postconviction relief standard; outside‑the‑record factual allegations may defeat res judicata)
McMullen v. Maxwell, 3 Ohio St.2d 160 (Ohio 1965) (example of collateral relief where constitutional violation was discovered after trial)
State v. Smith, 17 Ohio St.3d 98 (Ohio 1985) (noting that IAC claims inadequately supported by direct‑appeal record may be presented later with outside evidence)
State v. Calhoun, 86 Ohio St.3d 279 (Ohio 1999) (trial court may judge affidavit credibility in postconviction proceedings but should explain discounting of sworn affidavits)
State v. Geeslin, 116 Ohio St.3d 252 (Ohio 2007) (due‑process analysis for failure to preserve potentially exculpatory evidence)