State v. Bryant, 2014 Ohio 5306

Willis Bryant pleaded guilty to aggravated burglary and rape arising from a December 5, 2011 incident in which he threatened a female neighbor with a knife, forced her into her apartment, and compelled sexual acts while threatening her life.
Trial court originally sentenced Bryant to 10 years (aggravated burglary) and 11 years (rape), consecutive; this court affirmed convictions but vacated sentencing and remanded for a Johnson allied-offense analysis and proper consecutive-sentence findings.
On remand the prosecutor added factual detail (victim statements to police); Bryant objected under the Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause.
The trial court found the offenses did not merge (separate acts and separate animus) and again imposed consecutive sentences; Bryant appealed.
The Court of Appeals addressed (1) whether admitting the victim’s out-of-court statements at the resentencing hearing violated confrontation rights, and (2) whether rape and aggravated burglary were allied offenses requiring merger.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the resentencing court’s use of the victim’s out-of-court statements violated the Confrontation Clause	State: resentencing could lawfully develop the factual record per this court’s remand; sentencing hearings may rely on hearsay and a guilty plea waives confrontation	Bryant: prosecutor’s recitation of victim’s police statement was testimonial and deprived him of the right to confront witnesses	Court: plea waived confrontation rights; sentencing proceedings may consider reliable hearsay; no Sixth Amendment violation
Whether rape and aggravated burglary are allied offenses requiring merger under Johnson/R.C. 2941.25	State: Johnson allows merger inquiry; but facts show separate acts and animus supporting separate convictions	Bryant: the burglary was incidental to the rape — a single act/animus — so offenses should merge	Court: offenses can be committed with same conduct but here were committed by separate acts and with separate animus; no merger; consecutive sentences permissible

Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (Supreme Court of the United States) (testimonial statements and Confrontation Clause framework)
State v. Johnson, 128 Ohio St.3d 153 (Ohio 2010) (two-part allied-offense analysis)
Nolan v. Nolan, 11 Ohio St.3d 1 (Ohio 1984) (law-of-the-case doctrine)
State v. Williams, 134 Ohio St.3d 482 (Ohio 2012) (de novo review of R.C. 2941.25 merger determinations)
State v. Logan, 60 Ohio St.2d 126 (Ohio 1979) (definition of animus)
State v. Mughni, 33 Ohio St.3d 65 (Ohio 1987) (defendant bears burden to show entitlement to merger)
State v. Bickerstaff, 10 Ohio St.3d 62 (Ohio 1984) (disjunctive bars to merger under R.C. 2941.25)