State v. Johnson, 2017 Ohio 913

Shawn A. Johnson was indicted on aggravated robbery, felonious assault, and two firearm specifications; a jury convicted him on both counts and specifications.
The trial court merged the felonious assault count into aggravated robbery as allied offenses and imposed an aggregate nine-year prison sentence.
At sentencing the court reviewed the presentence report and R.C. 2929.12 factors, noted lack of remorse and prior delinquency/convictions, and discussed appellate counsel and post-release control.
Defense counsel told the court he had advised Johnson not to speak but also stated he had told Johnson the court "would ask him" if he had a statement; the court never personally asked Johnson if he wished to allocute.
The State conceded the court did not personally invite allocution and argued defense counsel invited the error; the appellate court reviewed invited-error doctrine and allocution requirements.
The Ninth District reversed Johnson’s sentence and remanded for resentencing because the court failed to personally afford allocution; remaining challenges on post-release control and R.C. 2929.19(B)(2)(f) were held moot on remand.

Issue	State's Argument	Johnson's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court denied Johnson his Crim.R. 32(A) right to allocution	Court could rely on defense counsel’s statement that he advised Johnson not to speak; error invited	Court never personally asked Johnson to speak; defense counsel expected the court to do so and did not actively cause the omission	Reversed: court failed to personally afford allocution; resentencing required
Whether sentencing notifications about post-release control and R.C. 2929.19(B)(2)(f) were defective	State did not press because allocution error occurred	Johnson argued required notifications were omitted or insufficient at sentencing	Moot on appeal due to required resentencing; not decided

State v. Campbell, 90 Ohio St.3d 320 (2000) (failure to afford allocution requires resentencing unless invited or harmless)
State v. Reynolds, 80 Ohio St.3d 670 (1998) (purpose of allocution is to permit defendant to speak or present mitigation)
State v. Green, 90 Ohio St.3d 352 (2000) (trial courts must clearly invite defendant to speak; strict adherence to Crim.R. 32)
Lester v. Leuck, 142 Ohio St. 91 (1943) (party cannot take advantage of an error it invited)
Carrothers v. Hunter, 23 Ohio St.2d 99 (1970) (invited-error requires more than acquiescence)
State v. Kollar, 93 Ohio St. 89 (1915) (defense counsel must be actively responsible for error for invited-error to apply)