State v. Hope, 2022 Ohio 1753

Background

Marshall Hope had prior felony convictions in Cuyahoga C.P. Nos. CR-19-644391, CR-19-644392, and CR-19-643005, which under R.C. 2152.02(C)(5) meant he was no longer a statutory “child.”
Three new incidents were filed in juvenile court alleging robbery/assault/brandishing; the State moved to transfer based on Hope’s adult felony record.
The juvenile court concluded it lacked jurisdiction under R.C. 2152.02(C)(5) and ordered the cases transferred to the general division under R.C. 2152.12(A)(2); its written journal entries mistakenly recited a probable-cause finding/stipulation, but the transcript shows the transfer was based on lack of jurisdiction.
In the general division Hope pleaded guilty to multiple offenses and received concurrent and consecutive prison terms (including a non-life indefinite Reagan Tokes sentence in one case).
On appeal Hope raised four assignments: (1) juvenile court failed to make a valid probable-cause finding before transfer; (2) mandatory transfer without an amenability hearing is unconstitutional (challenging Aalim II); (3) ineffective assistance for not requesting a probable-cause hearing; and (4) non-life indefinite sentence under Reagan Tokes is unconstitutional.
The Eighth District affirmed: it treated the juvenile court’s transfer as ministerial because the court lacked jurisdiction over a person not a statutory “child,” rejected Hope’s statutory and constitutional challenges, and overruled the Reagan Tokes challenge based on controlling precedent.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Hope)	Held
1. Was a probable-cause determination required before mandatory transfer under R.C. 2152.12(A)(2)?	Transfer under (A)(2) is ministerial when R.C. 2152.02(C)(5) applies; no probable-cause finding is required.	(Hope) Juvenile court erred by not conducting a probable-cause hearing before transfer.	The court held no probable-cause requirement under R.C. 2152.12(A)(2) when juvenile is not a statutory "child;" transfer was ministerial.
2. Does mandatory transfer without an amenability hearing violate due process (Aalim challenge)?	Aalim II controls; mandatory transfers without amenability hearings are constitutional.	(Hope) Mandatory transfer without amenability hearing is unconstitutional; Aalim II was wrongly decided.	The court followed Aalim II and overruled Hope’s challenge, noting no authority to overrule the Ohio Supreme Court.
3. Ineffective assistance for failing to request a probable-cause hearing?	No prejudice because (A)(2) required transfer regardless; counsel’s failure to request a hearing was not reversible error.	(Hope) Counsel was ineffective for not requesting probable-cause hearing.	Court rejected the claim as moot/without merit because juvenile court lacked jurisdiction and transfer was mandatory.
4. Is the non-life indefinite Reagan Tokes sentence unconstitutional?	The court cited binding Eighth District and en banc decisions rejecting broader constitutional challenges to Reagan Tokes.	(Hope) The non-life indefinite sentence under R.C. 2929.144/2929.14 is unconstitutional.	The court upheld the sentence, rejecting the Reagan Tokes challenge based on controlling precedent.

Key Cases Cited

State v. Aalim, 83 N.E.3d 862 (Ohio 2016) (original Aalim decision addressing juvenile bindover issues)
State v. Aalim, 83 N.E.3d 883 (Ohio 2017) (Aalim II — Ohio Supreme Court held mandatory transfers without amenability hearings constitutional)
State v. Marcum, 59 N.E.3d 1231 (Ohio 2016) (commentary on appellate review of sentences; warned against relying on dicta)
State v. Jones, 169 N.E.3d 649 (Ohio 2020) (court instructed appellate courts to disregard Supreme Court language that is dictum and conflicts with statute)
In re A.W., 155 N.E.3d 819 (Ohio 2020) (Ohio Supreme Court sua sponte reviewed and vacated dispositions when juvenile court lacked jurisdiction)
State v. Sealey, 173 N.E.3d 894 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021) (panel decision that questioned Reagan Tokes; later vacated/en banced in Eighth District)