State v. Parker, 2022 Ohio 3831

On Jan. 1, 2020, after a bar dispute in an OTR parking garage, Jordan Parker fired a gun, wounding three people; he fled, crashed the vehicle, and was detained; victims survived.
Parker was charged with three counts of felonious assault (with merged associated counts for deadly-weapon specifications), weapons-under-disability, and failure to comply with police; jury found him guilty on counts tried by jury; bench found him guilty on the rest.
Trial began April 14, 2021—after S.B. 175 (which removed the duty to retreat) took effect on April 6, 2021—though the shooting occurred in 2020.
At sentencing the court imposed multiple prison terms (including mandatory firearm specifications) and ordered some terms consecutive, producing a 13-year aggregate sentence; Parker appealed.
On appeal Parker raised four issues: jury instruction on self-defense/duty to retreat; ineffective assistance for not objecting; manifest-weight challenge to convictions; and failure to make required consecutive-sentencing findings under R.C. 2929.14(C)(4).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court erred by instructing the jury under the pre‑S.B.175 duty-to-retreat law	State: S.B.175 is not expressly retroactive; former law governs offenses before the effective date	Parker: Trial occurred after S.B.175; jury should have received the amended no‑duty‑to‑retreat instruction	No error — court applied former R.C. 2901.09; S.B.175 is substantive and not retroactive
Whether counsel was ineffective for failing to object to the self-defense instruction	State: No error in the instruction, so failure to object not deficient	Parker: Counsel should have objected to the instruction reflecting duty to retreat	No ineffective assistance — Strickland prongs fail because instruction was correct
Whether convictions were against the manifest weight of the evidence as to self-defense	State: Evidence undermined Parker’s claim of an objectively reasonable, honest belief of imminent deadly harm	Parker: He acted in self-defense (outnumbered, verbal threats, fear of weapons)	No manifest‑weight reversal — credibility conflicts were for the jury; convictions stand
Whether trial court failed to make required findings for consecutive sentences under R.C. 2929.14(C)(4)	State: Concedes sentencing error	Parker: Court did not make all required findings at sentencing hearing	Error — court failed to make the proportionality finding at the hearing; consecutive sentences vacated and remanded for new hearing

State v. Underwood, 3 Ohio St.3d 12 (1983) (failure to object at trial waives all but plain error)
State v. Rogers, 143 Ohio St.3d 385 (2015) (plain‑error standard articulated)
Hyle v. Porter, 117 Ohio St.3d 165 (2008) (statutes presumed prospective; retroactivity requires clear legislative intent)
Van Fossen v. Babcock & Wilcox Co., 36 Ohio St.3d 100 (1988) (statute is substantive when it creates a new right)
State v. Pitts, 163 N.E.3d 1169 (1st Dist. 2020) (example treating statutory amendment to self‑defense burden as procedural — discussed by parties)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two‑prong ineffective‑assistance standard)
State v. Bonnell, 140 Ohio St.3d 209 (2014) (trial court must make and incorporate R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) findings for consecutive sentences)
State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (1997) (standard for reviewing manifest weight claims)
State v. DeHass, 10 Ohio St.2d 230 (1967) (credibility and weight of evidence are for the trier of fact)