State v. Carter, 2019 Ohio 3485

Olivia Carter pleaded guilty to multiple counts arising from stealing a purse that contained three different credit cards; charged counts included multiple fifth-degree felonies, misdemeanors, and one second-degree felony (RICO-style count).
Each credit card belonged to a different entity/person (victim alone, victim with fiancé, and a medical facility) and each card was used by Carter at least once at different locations.
The parties negotiated a plea agreement resolving 17 original counts: they stipulated specific mergers among grouped counts and jointly recommended a two-year total sentence; the trial court accepted and imposed two years.
Carter appealed, raising (1) that certain Receiving Stolen Property counts should have merged under allied-offense/double-jeopardy principles and (2) ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to object to non-merger.
The trial court record shows the prosecutor and defense counsel discussed and presented the agreed merger scheme at plea hearing; defense counsel had no objection when the court accepted the mergers as presented.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Receiving Stolen Property counts should have merged under allied-offense/double-jeopardy rules	State: multiple convictions allowed because harms were distinct to separate victims	Carter: counts arose from one theft transaction and should merge	Court held no merger required: offenses were of dissimilar import because three separate parties suffered separate harms; moreover, merger was part of the negotiated plea and any claim is barred by invited error
Whether defense counsel was ineffective for not objecting to non-merger	State: plea resulted in favorable sentencing and dismissal of a count; counsel’s performance was reasonable strategy	Carter: counsel should have objected to preserve merger issue	Court held counsel not ineffective under Strickland; plea negotiation and results showed no deficient performance or prejudice

State v. Williams, 148 Ohio St.3d 403, 71 N.E.3d 234 (Ohio 2016) (sets out Ruff test for allied offenses and when multiple convictions are permitted)
State v. Ruff, 143 Ohio St.3d 114, 34 N.E.3d 892 (Ohio 2015) (framework for determining allied-offense and separate-harm analysis)
State v. Underwood, 124 Ohio St.3d 365, 922 N.E.2d 923 (Ohio 2010) (plea agreements that address allied-offense issues relieve trial court of separate R.C. 2941.25 analysis)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (two-prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
State v. Bradley, 42 Ohio St.3d 136 (Ohio 1989) (Ohio’s articulation of Strickland standard)
Lester v. Leuck, 142 Ohio St. 91 (Ohio 1943) (invited-error doctrine: a party cannot induce an error and then complain on appeal)