State v. Klembus, 2014 Ohio 3227

Klembus was charged with two counts of OVI and each count included a repeat OVI offender specification under R.C. 4511.19(G)(1)(d) and 2941.1413.
The repeat-offender specification look-back is twenty years and creates mandatory prison terms in addition to the underlying OVI punishment.
Klembus moved to dismiss the specification as violative of equal protection; the trial court denied the motion and Klembus pleaded no contest.
The trial court merged the two OVI counts for sentencing and imposed a two-year term (one year per count) plus a lifetime driving privileges suspension and vehicle forfeiture.
Klembus appealed, arguing the repeat-offender specification is unconstitutional on equal-protection grounds because it increases punishment without requiring additional elements.
The appellate court ultimately reversed in part and remanded to vacate the repeat-offender specification from the indictment.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Does the repeat OVI offender specification violate equal protection?	State contends the specification is rationally related to public safety interests.	Klembus argues the specification imposes greater punishment without extra elements, violating equal protection.	Yes; the specification violates equal protection and must be vacated.

Wilson v. State, 58 Ohio St.2d 52 (1979) (equal protection when identical activity/proof but different penalties may violate due process)
Gonzales v. State, 151 Ohio App.3d 160 (2002) (upheld cumulative punishment where legislature authorized it for major drug offender)
Midcap, 2006-Ohio-2854 (9th Dist.) (upheld enhanced penalty specifications under similar statutory framework)
Stillwell, 2007-Ohio-3190 (11th Dist.) (similar interpretation of enhanced penalties within 20-year look-back)
Zampini, 2008-Ohio-531 (11th Dist.) (discussed legislative intent to authorize cumulative punishment)
Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000) (penalty enhancements require proof of elements beyond a reasonable doubt)