State v. Patterson, 2012 Ohio 5511

Defendant Kenneth Patterson was indicted in a five-count indictment in Cuyahoga County for felonious assault (two counts), assault with a furthermore specification, domestic violence, and aggravated menacing.
Trial evidence showed Patterson threatened Farmer, struck her in the face, then retrieved knives and attacked Farmer and her relatives, resulting in minor injuries.
Officer Donitzen testified he witnessed Patterson restraining Farmer, striking her, and attempting to hit the officers when they arrived.
The jury convicted Patterson on all counts; the trial court sentenced him to concurrent terms totaling 30 months and assessed $2,359.20 in court costs.
The sentencing entry included court costs not discussed at the sentencing hearing, prompting a challenge under State v. Joseph.
The court remanded for Patterson to seek a waiver of court costs, while affirming the convictions and sentence on the merits.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was there reversible error in court costs not discussed in open court?	Patterson argues due process was violated by costs assessed in judgment entry without open-court discussion.	Patterson contends the costs should be waived or remanded for proper handling per Joseph.	Remanded for waiver of court costs.
Are the convictions for aggravated menacing, domestic violence, and felonious assault supported by sufficient evidence?	State asserts sufficient proof met elements of all charged offenses.	Patterson contends evidence was insufficient or weight-of-the-evidence issue.	Sufficient evidence supported all three convictions.
Was there ineffective assistance of counsel due to failure to object to certain questions?	State asserts no ineffective assistance given trial strategy and sufficiency of evidence.	Patterson claims counsel’s failure to object to certain questions prejudiced him.	No ineffective assistance; strategy and record support defense decisions.
Were the allied offenses properly merged under R.C. 2941.25?	State argues no merger because offenses were committed with separate animus and acts.	Patterson contends misapplication of merger doctrine.	No plain error; offenses were not allied and were properly sentenced concurrently.

State v. Joseph, 125 Ohio St.3d 76 (Ohio Supreme Court 2010) (costs must be discussed at sentencing; remand for waiver if not)
State v. Mays, 2012-Ohio-838 (Ohio App. 2d Dist. 2012) (remand for waiver of court costs after Joseph)
State v. Bowden, 8th Dist. No. 92266, 2009-Ohio-3598 (Eighth Dist. 2009) (standard for sufficiency review)
State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (Ohio 1997) (test for reasonable doubt; weight vs sufficiency framework)
State v. Ponce, 8th Dist. No. 91329, 2010-Ohio-1741 (Eighth Dist. 2010) (weights of evidence; credibility of witnesses)
State v. Johnson, 128 Ohio St.3d 153 (Ohio Supreme Court 2010) (defining allied offenses under 2941.25; conduct-focused analysis)
State v. Rance, 85 Ohio St.3d 632 (Ohio Supreme Court 1999) (earlier allied-offenses framework (overruled by Johnson))
State v. Poole, 2011-Ohio-716 (Eighth Dist. 2011) (two felonious assaults with separate victims not allied)
State v. Ware, 63 Ohio St.2d 84 (Ohio Supreme Court 1980) (merger doctrine codified; why separate offenses may not merge)
State v. Roberts, 62 Ohio St.2d 170 (Ohio Supreme Court 1980) (early merger framework)