State v. Jenkins
2017 Ohio 1073
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Jenkins was indicted on multiple counts (harassment with bodily substance, obstruction, disorderly conduct, resisting arrest) and pled no contest to one count of harassment with bodily substance (5th-degree felony); remaining counts were dismissed.
- On October 9, 2015 the trial court imposed community-control sanctions including intensive probation, mental-health/VA treatment, medication compliance/verification, abstinence from drugs/alcohol, and periodic status hearings.
- Probation reported Jenkins became an absconder after missing appointments and a status hearing; a warrant issued May 16, 2016 and Jenkins was arrested May 22, 2016.
- The revocation notice alleged failure to report for appointments, failure to abstain from illegal drugs (probation officer testified Jenkins admitted cocaine use), failure to verify prescriptions, failure to attend VA treatment, and failure to appear at a prior status hearing.
- At the June 22, 2016 revocation hearing probation testimony supported the violations; Jenkins testified he had been hospitalized, denied recent drug use, and claimed he had provided medication verification previously.
- The trial court found Jenkins violated community-control terms, revoked community control, imposed an 11-month prison sentence, and the appellate court—after an Anders brief from counsel and no pro se brief from Jenkins—affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether there was sufficient evidence to revoke community control | Substantial evidence showed violations: missed appointments/status hearing, probation officer testimony of admitted cocaine use, failure to verify meds, failure to attend VA treatment | Jenkins claimed hospitalization, said he provided meds verification to prior officer, denied recent drug use, and attempted contact with PO | Court found credible testimony and admissions establish violations; revocation not an abuse of discretion and was upheld |
| Whether revocation procedure/notice and defendant presence complied with Crim.R. 32.3 | Court provided notice of grounds and held a hearing with defendant present | Jenkins did not assert procedural defects at appellate level | Court treated hearing as compliant with Crim.R.32.3; procedural requirements satisfied |
| Whether any arguable appellate issues exist under Anders | State argued record supports revocation and sentence; no reversible error | Counsel filed an Anders brief asserting no meritorious issues; defendant filed no pro se brief | Appellate court performed independent review under Anders and found no arguable error; affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) (procedure when appellate counsel finds no meritorious issues)
- State v. Hylton, 75 Ohio App.3d 778 (1991) (community-control revocation hearing is not a criminal trial; State need only present substantial evidence of violation)