State v. Liso
2013 Ohio 4759
Ohio Ct. App.2013Background
- James Liso was charged with two counts of rape after two neighborhood children (ages 9 and 10) alleged he forced them to perform oral sex; jury acquitted on one count (B.M.) and convicted on the other (C.M.).
- Liso initially denied all contact, then voluntarily returned to the sheriff’s office to take a polygraph; during a pre‑polygraph interview he admitted sexual contact with C.M.
- Liso moved to suppress that statement as coerced; the trial court denied the motion, finding Liso had been Mirandized and waived rights.
- Liso testified at trial that his confession was made under pressure; trial counsel did not press a Due Process/voluntariness argument in the suppression motion and did not call the children’s babysitter as a defense witness.
- Trial court sentenced Liso to a flat 10‑year term; after the Department of Rehabilitation and Correction requested clarification, the court held a resentencing hearing (after Liso filed his notice of appeal) and amended the sentence to 10 years to life.
- On appeal the court affirmed convictions and counsel effectiveness rulings, vacated the post‑appeal resentencing for lack of trial court jurisdiction, and remanded for proper resentencing consistent with statute.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Voluntariness of confession / motion to suppress | State: confession voluntary; Liso waived Miranda and confession resulted from free choice | Liso: confession involuntary because detective induced promise he would not face a first‑degree felony | Court: confession voluntary under totality of circumstances; detective’s statement not sufficiently coercive; suppression denial affirmed |
| Ineffective assistance for failing to argue voluntariness in suppression motion | State: counsel’s omissions did not prejudice defendant because confession was voluntary | Liso: counsel ineffective for not raising Due Process involuntariness claim | Court: Strickland not satisfied; no prejudice shown given confession was voluntary; counsel effective |
| Ineffective assistance for not calling babysitter | State: counsel reasonably used strategy of highlighting state’s failure to call babysitter and cross‑examined to develop that point | Liso: counsel promised babysitter testimony and failed to call her, undermining defense | Court: decline to find ineffective assistance; withholding babysitter testimony was sound strategy and aided defense (acquittal on one count) |
| Resentencing after notice of appeal filed (jurisdiction) | State: trial court could correct sentence; substantive dispute over correct statutory term | Liso: trial court lacked jurisdiction to resentence after appeal; original judgment had been executed | Court: trial court lost jurisdiction upon filing of appeal; post‑appeal resentencing vacated and remanded for resentencing consistent with law |
| Validity of initial 10‑year sentence (statutory compliance) | State: trial court’s initial flat 10 years was inconsistent with statute permitting life exposure for rape of child under 13 | Liso: (argues post‑appeal resentencing improper) | Court: initial 10‑year sentence was void to the extent it disregarded statutory sentencing scheme; trial court may impose a proper sentence on remand |
Key Cases Cited
- Wiles v. State, 59 Ohio St.3d 71 (discusses voluntariness and standards for confessions)
- Culombe v. Connecticut, 367 U.S. 568 (coercion and voluntariness test for confessions)
- Colorado v. Connelly, 479 U.S. 157 (police coercion required for involuntariness)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (two‑part test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- In re S.J., 106 Ohio St.3d 11 (trial court loses jurisdiction after notice of appeal is filed)
- Beasley, State v., 14 Ohio St.3d 74 (sentence is void where court disregards statutory requirements)