State v. Hood
2017 Ohio 8920
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Jason Hood was indicted on multiple child-rape and gross sexual imposition counts; plea negotiations reduced charges to two counts of sexual battery (R.C. 2907.03(A)(5)) with a joint recommendation of two consecutive five-year terms (10 years total).
- Trial court accepted Hood's guilty plea, imposed the recommended 10-year sentence, and classified him a Tier III sex offender. Hood did not appeal.
- Over a year later Hood filed a postconviction petition alleging ineffective assistance of counsel (failure to request competency evaluation; failure to investigate alleged fabricated evidence by his wife and multiple DNA sources; coercion into pleading).
- The State moved for summary judgment, arguing res judicata, lack of operative facts/evidence, and no showing of deficient performance or prejudice.
- The trial court denied the petition without a hearing, granted summary judgment to the State, finding res judicata applicable to the voluntariness claim, that Hood offered only bare, speculative allegations with no affidavits or evidence, and that the plea was knowingly and voluntarily entered.
- The Seventh District Court of Appeals affirmed, holding the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a hearing or in granting summary judgment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Hood) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether denial of a postconviction evidentiary hearing was an abuse of discretion | Hood failed to proffer substantive grounds or evidentiary support; summary judgment appropriate | Counsel was ineffective; Hood alleged specific investigatory failures and coercion that warranted a hearing | No abuse: Hood produced only bare allegations with no affidavits/evidence; summary judgment and denial of hearing affirmed |
| Whether res judicata bars claims | Res judicata bars issues that could have been raised on direct appeal (e.g., plea voluntariness) | Some claims rest on evidence outside the record and thus are properly raised in postconviction proceedings | Res judicata barred the plea-voluntariness claim, but not the investigatory claims; nevertheless those claims lacked operative facts/evidence to require a hearing |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Cole, 2 Ohio St.3d 112 (1982) (standard for securing a postconviction evidentiary hearing requires substantive grounds)
- State v. Saxon, 109 Ohio St.3d 176 (2006) (res judicata bars issues that could have been raised on direct appeal)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-prong test for ineffective assistance: deficient performance and prejudice)
- State v. Bradley, 42 Ohio St.3d 136 (1989) (Ohio application of Strickland; burden to show counsel's performance fell below objective standard and caused prejudice)
- Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (1983) (abuse-of-discretion standard explained)