State v. Dickerson, 2013 Ohio 4345

Background

Regis L. Dickerson was indicted on two counts of murder with firearm specifications; a jury convicted him and the court merged counts and sentenced him to 18 years to life.
Dickerson appealed; this court affirmed his conviction and later denied his application to reopen the appeal.
Dickerson filed a pro se petition to vacate/set aside judgment raising nine claims: late disclosure of witnesses, multiple ineffective-assistance claims, juror exposure to prejudicial newspaper headlines, alleged prosecutorial misconduct about witness relationships, juror contact with victim’s family at a restaurant, and failure to call or investigate certain witnesses.
The state opposed the petition arguing res judicata, lack of evidentiary support, and failure to show ineffective assistance; the trial court denied the petition without an evidentiary hearing.
On appeal from that denial, the court reviewed whether the claims were barred by res judicata, whether trial counsel was ineffective under Strickland, and whether an evidentiary hearing was required.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether trial counsel was ineffective for failing to challenge late disclosure of key witnesses (Crim.R. 16 procedures)	State violated due process by withholding witness IDs until trial; counsel ineffective for not objecting	Dickerson argued prejudice from lack of pretrial disclosure and asserted Crim.R.16 unconstitutional	Claim barred by res judicata; evidence dehors the record not shown; no abuse of discretion in denial
Whether jurors were exposed to prejudicial newspaper headlines and court/counsel inquiry was inadequate	Newspaper revealed prior acquittal; court failed to follow up and counsel failed to object	Court asked jurors; jurors denied reading article; defense counsel did not pursue further	Previously litigated in reopening; negative juror response obviated further inquiry; claim barred/resolved against Dickerson
Whether prosecutor committed misconduct by stating two witnesses did not know each other (and counsel failed to investigate/call contrary witness)	Prosecutor misled jury; counsel ineffective for not calling Inga McMorris who could show witnesses knew each other	State could not be charged with knowledge; McMorris letter insufficient to show prejudice	Even if true, Dickerson failed to show prejudice under Strickland; claim denied
Whether juror impartiality was compromised by victim’s family eating near jurors during deliberations	Jurors and victim’s family ate at same Subway; overheard discussion of prior case and possible influence on jurors	Evidence is only that they were in same place; no proof of communication or influence	Speculation insufficient; no actual prejudice shown; claim barred by res judicata or denied on merits
Whether an evidentiary hearing was required on the petition	Dickerson argued facts warranted hearing to develop claims	State argued petition, record, and attachments did not show operative facts entitling relief	No hearing required where claims are barred by res judicata or lack substantive operative facts; denial affirmed

Key Cases Cited

Strickland v. Washington, 446 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-pronged ineffective-assistance standard: deficient performance and prejudice)
State v. Bradley, 42 Ohio St.3d 136 (1989) (prejudice requires reasonable probability of different outcome)
State v. Cole, 2 Ohio St.3d 112 (1982) (res judicata bars postconviction claims that could be raised on direct appeal when no evidence dehors the record is needed)
State v. Reynolds, 79 Ohio St.3d 158 (1997) (res judicata preclusion for issues that could have been raised on direct appeal)
State v. Szefcyk, 77 Ohio St.3d 93 (1996) (discussing limits of collateral attack and res judicata)
State v. Gondor, 112 Ohio St.3d 377 (2006) (standard of review for postconviction relief rulings)
State v. Smith, 89 Ohio St.3d 323 (2000) (reiterating Strickland framework in Ohio)
State v. Perry, 10 Ohio St.2d 175 (1967) (grounds for dismissal of postconviction petitions without hearing)