State v. Miree, 2024 Ohio 5714

Miree and Duncan were charged with offenses including murder and felonious assault related to the June 2019 death of Ramses Hurley during an attempted robbery.
Their trial began in June 2021, after Ohio amended its self-defense law (R.C. 2901.09) on April 6, 2021, to lessen the duty to retreat before using force.
At trial, the judge used jury instructions from the former self-defense statute, requiring consideration of a duty to retreat, despite defense objections.
Both defendants were convicted and sentenced to 15 years to life in prison.
On appeal, Miree and Duncan argued the court should have used the new, post-amendment self-defense standard that prohibits considering the possibility of retreat, since their trial occurred after the new law's effective date.
The Eighth District Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court, holding the amended law was not retroactive to offenses committed before its effective date; the Ohio Supreme Court granted review.

Issue	Miree/Duncan's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Applicability of new R.C. 2901.09 (stand your ground law) to pre-amendment acts	The amended law should apply to all trials after its effective date, regardless of offense date.	The law is substantive, not retroactive; only applies to conduct after amendment's effective date.	The law does not retroactively apply to offenses before its effective date.
Jury instruction on duty to retreat at trial	It was error to instruct the jury on a duty to retreat under the old law at a post-amendment trial.	Jury must apply law as it existed at time of alleged conduct (2019), which required retreat.	Old law and duty to retreat correctly applied given date of conduct.
Procedural/prospective application of new restriction on jury consideration	R.C. 2901.09(C)'s procedural language applies to all trials after April 6, 2021, barring jury from considering retreat.	Must be read with (B): since duty existed at the time, jury may consider it; no retroactivity.	Majority: Section (C) can't be separated from (B) and does not apply retroactively.
Substantive vs. procedural statutory change	R.C. 2901.09(C) is simply a procedural/jury instruction change, not substantive, so should apply to ongoing trials.	It's intertwined with substantive rights/obligations in (B), so cannot apply retroactively.	Court: The change is substantive and tied to duty at the time of offense.

State v. Consilio, 114 Ohio St.3d 295 (clarified presumption of prospective statutory operation)
State v. Brooks, 166 Ohio St.3d 1 (burden of proof amendment held procedural and applied prospectively to trials, regardless of offense date)
State v. Ellis, 64 Ohio St.3d 391 (self-defense as a substantive right under Ohio law)
State v. Williford, 49 Ohio St.3d 247 (self-defense rights and legislative intent)
State v. Champion, 109 Ohio St. 281 (self-defense as a right affecting trial outcomes)