2023 Ohio 1248
Ohio Ct. App.2023Background
- Officer stopped Joshua Freshwater for a traffic violation and smelled raw marijuana; Freshwater refused to sit in the cruiser and engaged in a physical altercation during which a taser was deployed.
- Backup was required; officers searched the vehicle and found $1,000 and three baggies of cocaine totaling 83.92 grams.
- Freshwater was indicted on multiple drug and related charges, including obstructing official business and possession/trafficking counts; he moved to suppress evidence and the motion was denied.
- Pursuant to a plea agreement, Freshwater pleaded no-contest to obstructing official business and possession of cocaine; other counts were dismissed.
- At sentencing the court imposed 12 months on obstructing and an indefinite Reagan Tokes term of 5 to 7.5 years on possession (to run concurrently); Freshwater challenged the sentence under R.C. 2929.11/2929.12 and raised multiple constitutional challenges to the Reagan Tokes Act on appeal.
- The Eleventh District affirmed the convictions and sentences.
Issues
| Issue | State's Argument | Freshwater's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court erred by imposing the individual sentences as unsupported by R.C. 2929.11/2929.12 | Court considered permissible seriousness and recidivism factors; no requirement for specific on-the-record formulaic findings | Sentence is unsupported by R.C. 2929.12 factors and therefore contrary to law | Affirmed — court properly considered relevant factors (altercation, long criminal history, treatment attempts); consideration was permissible and not "contrary to law" |
| Whether the Reagan Tokes Act is unconstitutionally vague | State presumes statute constitutional; many appellate decisions have upheld the statute | Statute is void for vagueness | Rejected — Court declined to find vagueness; appellate precedent treats the statute as constitutional (plain-error standard where not raised below) |
| Whether Reagan Tokes violates separation of powers | State defends statute; other appellate decisions uphold it | Statute unlawfully delegates sentencing authority or upends separation of powers | Rejected — court followed existing appellate authority upholding Reagan Tokes |
| Whether Reagan Tokes violates jury trial, due process, or fair-trial rights | State: statute constitutional and does not implicate infringement of jury or due-process rights | Indeterminate sentence under Reagan Tokes violates Sixth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendment and state constitutional rights | Rejected — court held the statute does not facially violate jury or due-process rights, citing controlling appellate decisions |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Jones, 169 N.E.3d 649 (Ohio 2020) (defines when a sentence is "contrary to law" and limits appellate inquiry)
- State v. Bryant, 198 N.E.3d 68 (Ohio 2022) (rejects sentencing based on impermissible extraneous factors)
- State v. Hacker, 161 N.E.3d 112 (Ohio Ct. App.) (upholds Reagan Tokes Act against constitutional challenge)
- State v. Bontrager, 188 N.E.3d 607 (Ohio Ct. App.) (rejects facial constitutional challenges to Reagan Tokes)
- State v. Ratliff, 190 N.E.3d 684 (Ohio Ct. App.) (upholds Reagan Tokes sentencing scheme)
- State v. Maddox, 188 N.E.3d 682 (Ohio Ct. App.) (rejects constitutional attacks on Reagan Tokes)
- State v. Delvallie, 185 N.E.3d 536 (Ohio Ct. App.) (en banc) (upholds Reagan Tokes)
- State v. Runner, 204 N.E.3d 162 (Ohio Ct. App.) (addresses Reagan Tokes challenges and affirms constitutionality)