State v. Glenn, 2021 Ohio 264

Background

On March 21, 2019 law enforcement executed a search warrant at 223 West Columbia St.; drugs were recovered inside the residence and in Glenn’s vehicle; co-defendants Illya Green and Kevin Swift were arrested.
A grand jury indicted Glenn on multiple drug counts and related specifications; she pleaded not guilty and proceeded to trial; two counts were dismissed before trial.
Glenn moved under Crim.R. 16 to compel production of videos, reports, and documentation of five prior controlled buys at the same address; the trial court denied the motion after offering an in-camera review which defense counsel declined.
At trial the jury convicted Glenn on the remaining counts and the major drug-offender specification; the court merged Counts 1 and 2 for sentencing and the State elected Count 2 for punishment.
The trial court imposed mandatory prison terms on individual counts and ordered them to run consecutively for an aggregate 20-year sentence; Glenn appealed, raising three assignments of error: evidentiary/discovery rulings, consecutive-sentence findings, and manifest-weight.
The appellate court affirmed on evidentiary and manifest-weight grounds but reversed the consecutive-sentence component, vacating the sentence and remanding for resentencing because required on-the-record statutory findings were not made at the sentencing hearing (they appeared only in the entry).

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether trial court abused discretion by denying Crim.R.16 discovery of five prior controlled buys (Brady material)	State: prior buys unrelated to charged March 21 conduct; will not use them at trial; trial court offered in-camera review; disclosure not required	Glenn: videos/reports would be exculpatory/impeaching (show Green, not her, trafficked) and thus material under Crim.R.16/Brady	Denial was not an abuse. Defense counsel refused in-camera review and the record lacks the materials; State limited trial to March 21 conduct, so evidence wasn’t shown to be material to defense.
Admissibility of Green’s out-of-court statements to officer (statement against interest under Evid.R. 804(B)(3))	State: objected; trial court excluded as not admissible hearsay (court ultimately did not need to resolve error for reversal)	Glenn: Green’s statements to deputy (accepting responsibility, saying Glenn had nothing to do with drugs) were admissible as statements against interest and exculpatory	Court declined to reverse on this basis—even assuming harmless error, cumulative-error doctrine required multiple errors which were not shown; first assignment overruled.
Whether convictions were against the manifest weight of the evidence	State: evidence at trial supported convictions	Glenn: convictions were against manifest weight; asked appellate court to review trial transcript	Waived/inadequately argued on appeal; court declined to review; third assignment overruled.
Whether trial court erred by imposing consecutive sentences without required on-the-record findings under R.C. 2929.14(C)(4)	State: sentencing entry contained required findings	Glenn: trial court failed to make statutory consecutive-sentence findings at the sentencing hearing	Reversed for resentencing. Court held that although the judgment entry contained the R.C. 2929.14(C)(4)(b) finding, the trial court failed to make all required findings at the hearing itself, so consecutive sentences were contrary to law.

Key Cases Cited

Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (U.S. 1963) (suppression of favorable evidence violates due process)
Kyles v. Whitley, 514 U.S. 419 (U.S. 1995) (materiality standard: "reasonable probability" the result would differ)
United States v. Bagley, 473 U.S. 667 (U.S. 1985) (Brady materiality formulation)
State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (Ohio 1997) (manifest-weight review standard)
State v. Bonnell, 140 Ohio St.3d 209 (Ohio 2014) (consecutive-sentence findings must appear on the record at sentencing)
State v. Marcum, 146 Ohio St.3d 516 (Ohio 2016) (appellate standard for reviewing felony sentences under R.C. 2953.08)
State v. Osie, 140 Ohio St.3d 131 (Ohio 2014) (Brady/Crim.R.16 materiality: reasonable probability undermining confidence)
State v. Powell, 132 Ohio St.3d 233 (Ohio 2012) (cumulative-error doctrine discussed)
State v. Garner, 74 Ohio St.3d 49 (Ohio 1995) (cumulative-error framework)
State v. Issa, 93 Ohio St.3d 49 (Ohio 2001) (abuse-of-discretion standard for evidentiary rulings)
State v. DeHass, 10 Ohio St.2d 230 (Ohio 1967) (deference to factfinder on credibility and weight of evidence)