State v. Brazo, 2022 Ohio 2066

Stephen Brazo was indicted for aggravated possession of methamphetamine (second-degree felony) and scheduled for trial on October 8, 2020.
On the trial date Brazo arrived late, chose to plead guilty after a plea colloquy, and agreed with the state’s recitation of facts.
The trial court informed Brazo of constitutional rights waived by the plea and the maximum penalty; the court imposed a Reagan Tokes sentence of 3 to 4½ years.
Brazo moved to withdraw his plea; the trial court denied the motion.
On direct appeal this court initially declined to address Brazo’s constitutional challenge to the Reagan Tokes Act as not ripe; the Ohio Supreme Court’s decision in Maddox made such challenges ripe and the case was remanded.
On remand the court addressed two assignments of error: (1) challenge to the constitutionality of R.C. §2967.271 (Reagan Tokes hybrid indefinite terms) and (2) ineffective assistance for counsel’s failure to challenge that statute.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Constitutionality of Reagan Tokes (R.C. §2967.271)	State: the statute is constitutional and authorizes valid indefinite terms	Brazo: statute violates separation of powers, the right to jury trial, and due process	Court: statute is constitutional; assignment of error overruled
Ineffective assistance for not challenging §2967.271	State: no prejudice because the statute is constitutional	Brazo: counsel was deficient for failing to raise the constitutional challenge	Court: claim fails under Strickland; no prejudice because underlying claim lacked merit

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (establishes two-part ineffective-assistance-of-counsel test)
State v. Bradley, 42 Ohio St.3d 136, 538 N.E.2d 373 (1989) (adopts Ohio application of Strickland standard)