State v. Grayson, 95 N.E.3d 1025

On May 18, 2016 Michael Grayson fired six shots through the front window of a duplex unit where his ex-girlfriend Fannie Loper, Roychemere Bolling, several children, and other family members were present; Bolling suffered two gunshot wounds.
Grayson was indicted on ten counts including four counts of improperly discharging a firearm into a habitation (R.C. 2923.161(A)(1)), multiple felonious-assault counts, weapons-under-disability, and child-endangering; firearm specifications attached to counts one through seven.
A jury convicted Grayson on all counts; the trial court sentenced him to concurrent and consecutive terms producing an aggregate 23-year sentence for the primary case.
On appeal Grayson argued (1) the four habitation-discharge counts should merge into one unit of prosecution, and (2) convictions for discharging into a habitation should merge with the felonious-assault convictions as allied offenses.
The appellate court held the four habitation-discharge counts must merge into a single conviction (vacating sentence and remanding for resentencing on that ground) but rejected merger of the habitation-discharge offense with the felonious-assault convictions (affirming that those are of dissimilar import).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether multiple counts for discharging a firearm into a habitation (multiple victims present) must merge into a single count	State argued separate counts justified because shots were aimed at particular individuals and multiple persons were at risk	Grayson argued statute punishes the act against the habitation (structure), so multiple counts based solely on number of people in the unit are impermissible	Court held the four counts merged into one unit of prosecution; reversed on that ground
Whether discharging a firearm into a habitation and felonious assault are allied offenses of similar import	State argued assault convictions are distinct because they punish harm to individuals	Grayson argued both arise from the same conduct and should merge as allied offenses	Court held they are not allied: discharging into a habitation protects the structure while assault protects individual victims; convictions may stand separately

State v. Ruff, 143 Ohio St.3d 114, 2015-Ohio-995, 34 N.E.3d 892 (articulates the conduct-based allied-offenses test and three-part inquiry)
State v. Gardner, 118 Ohio St.3d 420, 2008-Ohio-2787, 889 N.E.2d 995 (burglary and related offenses focus on the dwelling as the object of the offense)
State v. Wills, 69 Ohio St.3d 690, 1995-Ohio-16, 635 N.E.2d 370 (definition of a transaction for firearm-specification analysis)
State v. Marriott, 189 Ohio App.3d 98, 2010-Ohio-3115, 937 N.E.2d 614 (burglary offenses punish trespass into structures)
State v. Brown, 119 Ohio St.3d 447, 2008-Ohio-4569, 895 N.E.2d 149 (legislative intent can obviate allied-offense analysis when clear)
State v. Miranda, 138 Ohio St.3d 184, 2014-Ohio-451, 5 N.E.3d 603 (R.C. 2941.25 is not the sole legislative declaration on multiplicity of indictments)