State v. Curtis
2018 Ohio 2822
Ohio Ct. App.2018Background
- Curtis, a child-care worker, was accused by a minor resident of sexual contact and of taking nude photos stored on his cell phone; police seized and later searched the phone.
- He was indicted on numerous felony counts (63 counts relating to illegal use of a minor in nudity-oriented material and 11 counts of sexual battery); he pleaded guilty to a negotiated subset of counts and received an aggregate 11-year prison sentence.
- Curtis did not timely file a direct appeal; a delayed appeal was denied. He later filed a petition for post-conviction relief claiming ineffective assistance of trial counsel and seeking discovery.
- The trial court denied the post-conviction petition after finding Curtis had not submitted sufficient operative facts or evidentiary material to show counsel was deficient or that Curtis was prejudiced.
- Curtis appealed pro se; the appellate court reviewed the denial for abuse of discretion and affirmed the trial court’s denial, holding Curtis failed to meet the threshold to obtain an evidentiary hearing or discovery in post-conviction proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Curtis received ineffective assistance of counsel during plea negotiations | Curtis argued counsel coerced him into pleading guilty by threatening a "life" sentence and failed to investigate | Counsel advised that exposure was effectively a life term and negotiated a favorable plea, obtained discovery, moved to suppress, and hired an expert; Curtis offered no affidavits or operative facts | Denied — Curtis failed to submit sufficient operative facts/affidavits to show deficient performance or prejudice under Strickland/Hill; no coercion shown |
| Whether trial counsel failed to investigate the case (including suppression issues and victim credibility) | Curtis claimed counsel did not properly investigate or challenge evidence | Record shows counsel sought/received discovery, litigated suppression, hired an expert, negotiated plea, and advocated at sentencing; Curtis submitted no documentary proof of inadequate investigation | Denied — Curtis did not meet the Calhoun threshold to obtain a hearing; deference to counsel’s reasonable strategic choices |
| Whether the trial court erred by denying discovery in the post-conviction proceeding | Curtis argued he needed discovery to develop his claims | State and trial court relied on statute and precedent holding post-conviction proceedings do not provide an entitlement to discovery | Denied — No statutory right to discovery in Ohio post-conviction proceedings; Curtis showed no prejudice from denial |
| Whether the post-conviction court abused its discretion in dismissing without a hearing | Curtis claimed the court should have held an evidentiary hearing based on his submissions | Trial court found submitted materials were self-serving and insufficient; judge who presided over plea/sentencing was well placed to assess credibility | Denied — appellate court found trial court’s findings supported by competent, credible evidence and not an abuse of discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (two-part test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52 (U.S. 1985) (prejudice standard for counsel errors affecting a guilty plea)
- Lockhart v. Fretwell, 506 U.S. 364 (U.S. 1993) (prejudice inquiry and consequences for counsel error)
- State v. Calhoun, 86 Ohio St.3d 279 (Ohio 1999) (trial court gatekeeping; petition dismissal where insufficient operative facts)
- State v. Gondor, 112 Ohio St.3d 377 (Ohio 2006) (abuse-of-discretion review for post-conviction rulings)
- Gonzalez–Lopez v. United States, 548 U.S. 140 (U.S. 2006) (structural error for erroneous denial of counsel of choice)
- State v. Cowans, 87 Ohio St.3d 68 (Ohio 1999) (counsel must give candid appraisal; no duty to be optimistic)
- State v. Hooks, 92 Ohio St.3d 83 (Ohio 2001) (record cannot be enlarged by new matter on appeal)