State v. Prophet, 2015 Ohio 4997

Defendant James Prophet, a registered sex offender, was indicted for felony failure to provide notice of change of address (R.C. 2950.05) after alleged address-reporting lapses between Nov. 26, 2013 and Jan. 18, 2014.
Prophet filed a pro se motion for new counsel alleging poor communication; counsel nevertheless proceeded and Prophet pled guilty on Sept. 8, 2014 after a plea colloquy in which he generally answered appropriately but misstated his age.
At sentencing defense counsel reported Prophet had mental-health issues and treatment history; the presentence investigation (PSI) noted diagnoses and psychotropic medications; counsel asked for intensive supervision.
The court imposed three years of community control with specialized sex-offender supervision and required continued mental-health treatment and compliance with registration duties.
On appeal Prophet argued (1) the trial court erred by not sua sponte ordering a competency evaluation, and (2) trial counsel was ineffective for failing to seek a competency evaluation.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether trial court abused discretion by not sua sponte ordering competency evaluation before plea/sentencing	State: Record lacks sufficient indicia of incompetence to require a hearing	Prophet: mental illness, medications, PSI statements, plea-age error, pro se filings, and sentencing exchanges showed indicia of incompetence	No abuse of discretion; record did not show sufficient indicia of incompetence
Whether counsel was ineffective for failing to request competency evaluation	State: Counsel’s performance cannot be shown deficient from the record; no prejudice shown	Prophet: counsel failed to investigate competency and should have requested evaluation	Counsel not shown deficient or prejudicial on the record; ineffective-assistance claim denied

Dusky v. United States, 362 U.S. 402 (competency standard: rational and factual understanding and ability to consult with counsel)
Pate v. Robinson, 383 U.S. 375 (due process requires competency inquiry when indicia present)
Drope v. Missouri, 420 U.S. 162 (competency inquiry required where sufficient indicia of incompetence exist)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (two-prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
State v. Berry, 72 Ohio St.3d 354 (mental illness does not necessarily equal legal incompetence)
State v. Mink, 101 Ohio St.3d 350 (competency standard for plea equals competency for trial)
State v. Bock, 28 Ohio St.3d 108 (taking psychotropic drugs does not alone establish incompetence)
State v. Eley, 77 Ohio St.3d 174 (failure to hold competency hearing is harmless if record lacks indicia of incompetence)
State v. Jordan, 101 Ohio St.3d 216 (defendant presumed competent; burden to prove incompetence)
State v. Ketterer, 111 Ohio St.3d 70 (prescription of psychotropic drugs alone insufficient to negate competence)