State v. Graham
2018 Ohio 5003
Ohio Ct. App.2018Background
- Stacey Graham was indicted in Wood County for third-degree burglary (theft from a Walmart on/around March 2, 2017).
- Bench trial occurred December 20, 2017; Graham moved for acquittal at close of the prosecution’s case, which was denied; he did not present a defense.
- The trial court convicted Graham and later sentenced him to 36 months’ imprisonment, to run consecutively to an 18‑month Sandusky County sentence.
- Graham appealed, raising four assignments of error: (1–2) insufficiency of evidence re: trespass by force/stealth/deception, (3) trial court lacked jurisdiction because Graham did not validly waive his jury right, and (4) maximum sentence unsupported.
- The parties and record conceded there was no written, signed, filed jury-waiver complying with R.C. 2945.05; the trial court proceeded after oral statements that Graham had waived. The State conceded the court failed to properly obtain waiver.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court properly accepted a waiver of jury trial without the written, signed, filed waiver required by R.C. 2945.05 / Crim.R. 23(A) | State: Bench trial was proper; parties and defendant tacitly consented to proceed without objection | Graham: No strict compliance with statutory/written-waiver requirements; thus no valid waiver and court lacked jurisdiction to try him without a jury | Reversed: Plain error—no written signed/filed waiver; error was obvious and affected substantial right; new trial required |
| Whether evidence was sufficient to prove burglary (trespass by force, stealth, or deception) | State: Evidence supported burglary conviction (trial court found beyond a reasonable doubt) | Graham: Insufficient evidence that he trespassed by force/stealth/deception; walking through open doors is not force | Moot (court did not decide due to reversal on waiver) |
| Whether conviction should be overturned for insufficiency of trespass-by-deception/stealth | State: Evidence supports finding of deception/stealth as alleged | Graham: Record lacks proof of deception/stealth; alternative explanations exist | Moot |
| Whether the maximum/consecutive sentence was supported by the record | State: Court’s findings about criminal history and danger supported sentence | Graham: Sentence not clearly and convincingly supported by record | Moot |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Tate, 59 Ohio St.2d 50 (1979) (right to jury trial under Ohio Constitution and R.C. 2945.17)
- State v. Lomax, 114 Ohio St.3d 350 (2007) (Crim.R. 23(A) requires written waiver in serious-offense cases)
- State v. Reese, 106 Ohio St.3d 65 (2005) (strict compliance with R.C. 2945.05 required for valid jury waiver)
- State v. Pless, 74 Ohio St.3d 333 (1996) (trial court lacks jurisdiction to try defendant without statutory waiver)
- State v. Payne, 114 Ohio St.3d 502 (2007) (plain-error review framework in criminal cases)
- State v. Barnes, 94 Ohio St.3d 21 (2002) (elements of plain error)
- State v. Jells, 53 Ohio St.3d 22 (1990) (but-for standard for plain error affecting outcome)
- State v. Long, 53 Ohio St.2d 91 (1978) (plain error and prejudice standard)
- State v. Gilbert, 143 Ohio St.3d 150 (2014) (consent cannot supply subject-matter jurisdiction where statute prescribes requirements)
- Simmons v. State, 75 Ohio St. 346 (1906) (presumptions against waiver of constitutional rights)