State v. Felton
2017 Ohio 761
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- William D. Felton is a registered sex offender with prior convictions for first-degree rape and kidnapping; he served concurrent six-year terms and was subject to post-release control.
- Between 2009–2015 Felton incurred multiple convictions and post-release-control revocations; in Nov. 2015 he was arrested after absconding from a VOA placement.
- Felton was indicted (Apr. 2016) for failure to notify (R.C. 2950.05), a third-degree felony; he pled guilty on Aug. 11, 2016. The State agreed not to request additional time for any post-release-control (PRC) violation.
- The trial court accepted the plea, ordered a PSI, and on Aug. 26, 2016 sentenced Felton to two years imprisonment, awarded 35 days credit, imposed court costs, and disapproved placement in shock incarceration/intensive program.
- Appellate counsel filed an Anders brief concluding no non-frivolous issues; the Second District conducted an independent Penson review and affirmed the conviction and sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether plea complied with Crim.R. 11 (constitutional & non-constitutional advisements) | Court substantially/strictly complied with Crim.R. 11; plea valid | Felton could argue incomplete advisement about PRC revocation consequences | Court found Crim.R.11 compliance for constitutional rights; omission re: mandatory consecutive PRC term was not prejudicial because State declined to seek PRC sentence and court did not revoke PRC—no meritorious claim |
| Whether trial court erred in failing to state reasons for disapproving shock/incarceration programs (R.C. 2929.19(D)) | Court made findings on the record disapproving placement | Felton could argue findings were inadequate on face of entry/transcript | Although findings arguably thin, disapproval was harmless because Felton was statutorily ineligible (prior first-degree felonies) — no reversible error |
| Whether sentencing (2-year term, jail credit, costs) was contrary to law or unsupported | Sentence within statutory range; PRC obligations and consequences were explained; jail credit and costs proper | Felton could challenge calculation or discretionary rulings | Court found sentence lawful and supported by record under R.C. 2953.08(G)(2) — no reversible error |
| Whether trial counsel provided ineffective assistance | Counsel’s performance not shown to be deficient or prejudicial | Felton argues counsel erred in plea/sentencing advice or failing to preserve issues | Court found no non-frivolous ineffective-assistance claim under Strickland — affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967) (procedural framework for counsel withdrawing when appeal is frivolous)
- Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (U.S. 1988) (appellate courts must independently review Anders briefs)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (two-prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- State v. Clark, 119 Ohio St.3d 239 (Ohio 2008) (Crim.R. 11 strict/substantial compliance guidance)
- State v. Nero, 56 Ohio St.3d 106 (Ohio 1990) (substantial compliance standard for non-constitutional advisements)
- State v. Kelley, 57 Ohio St.3d 127 (Ohio) (guilty plea waives prior trial errors unless plea involuntary)
- State v. Veney, 120 Ohio St.3d 176 (Ohio 2008) (prejudice requirement for non-constitutional Crim.R.11 errors)
- State v. Marcum, 146 Ohio St.3d 516 (Ohio 2016) (appellate standard under R.C. 2953.08(G)(2) for felony-sentence review)