State v. Nicholson, 2017 Ohio 7312

Damarcus Nicholson was indicted on multiple drug counts relating to heroin in August 2016.
He moved to suppress drug evidence from a rental vehicle; the trial court denied suppression for lack of standing.
The first jury proceeding on September 28, 2016, ended in a mistrial based on a motion in limine issue; a written entry memorializing the mistrial was filed October 11, 2016.
A second jury trial (beginning September 29, 2016) resulted in convictions; Nicholson was sentenced to an aggregate eight-year prison term and unsuccessfully appealed (affirmed May 15, 2017).
On April 28, 2017 (after the second trial but before this court’s decision on the direct appeal), Nicholson filed pro se for a transcript of the September 28 mistrial proceedings at state expense; the trial court denied the request on May 2, 2017.
Nicholson appealed the denial, arguing the transcript was necessary for his direct appeal; the appellate court affirmed the trial court.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court erred by denying an indigent defendant a transcript of the mistrial proceedings at state expense	The State implicitly argued the mistrial transcript was not necessary for an effective appeal and alternative records sufficed	Nicholson argued the transcript of the mistrial was needed to further his direct appeal and prepare for retrial	Denial affirmed: defendant failed to show the transcript was necessary for an effective appeal or that denial caused prejudice

Britt v. North Carolina, 404 U.S. 226 (U.S. 1971) (indigent defendants are entitled to a transcript or equivalent for an effective appeal)
State v. Arrington, 42 Ohio St.2d 114 (Ohio 1975) (State must provide transcript of prior proceedings when needed for an effective defense or appeal)
State v. Thacker, 54 Ohio St.2d 43 (Ohio 1978) (transcripts from a mistrial must be provided when defendant shows they are necessary to prepare for retrial)