State v. Mick, 2022 Ohio 2378

Richard C. Mick, former pastor at Litehouse Baptist Church, was accused by multiple child victims who attended his church or its youth programs of sexual abuse that they disclosed years after the alleged events.
Initial 2014 indictment (rape and gross sexual imposition) led to a first jury trial resulting in convictions, which this court reversed for denial of the right to counsel.
A second joint trial in 2019 ended in a mistrial after the defense discovered an undisclosed supplemental police report; the court found no bad-faith misconduct and scheduled a new trial.
Third trial (Sept. 2020) produced convictions: guilty of rape of E.M. (one count) and guilty on eight counts of gross sexual imposition against E.S.; Mick was sentenced to life plus concurrent terms and classified as a Tier II sexual offender.
Defense theory emphasized a vendetta by Mick’s ex-wife (Karen Mick) and attacked delayed disclosures; prosecution relied on corroborating disclosures and expert testimony about delayed disclosure/grooming.
Mick appealed, raising two assignments: (1) ineffective assistance of trial counsel; (2) double jeopardy bar to retrial based on the mistrial and alleged prosecutorial misconduct.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Ineffective assistance of counsel	Mick: counsel was deficient for not calling a defense expert on recovered/repressed memory, for permitting a retired police detective to sit on the jury, and for inadequate cross-examination/corroboration attacks	State: counsel’s choices were strategic (relied on cross-exam of state expert, did not elicit bias from juror, peremptory use and cross-exam scope were trial tactics)	Court: No ineffective assistance. Decisions fell within reasonable strategy; no deficient performance or demonstrated prejudice under Strickland.
Double jeopardy (retrial after mistrial)	Mick: third trial violated Double Jeopardy because mistrial was caused by prosecutorial misconduct or a pattern of concealment, and delay justified dismissal	State: the nondisclosure was inadvertent; defense sought mistrial without claiming bad faith; retrial permissible absent intentional prosecutorial conduct to provoke mistrial	Court: Denial of dismissal affirmed. Kennedy exception not met—no record evidence of intentional/provoking misconduct; retrial allowed.

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (ineffective-assistance-of-counsel standard)
Missouri v. Frye, 566 U.S. 134 (right to effective counsel principles)
Oregon v. Kennedy, 456 U.S. 667 (narrow double-jeopardy exception when prosecution intends to provoke mistrial)
State v. Loza, 71 Ohio St.3d 61 (Ohio application of Kennedy double-jeopardy rule)
State v. Murphy, 91 Ohio St.3d 516 (permitting former law-enforcement personnel to serve on juries absent demonstrated bias)
State v. Nicholas, 66 Ohio St.3d 431 (failure to call expert may be reasonable strategy)
State v. Bradley, 42 Ohio St.3d 136 (standard for assessing counsel performance)