2022 Ohio 1058
Ohio Ct. App.2022Background
- Reed conspired with four codefendants to rob Albert Crenshaw; after the attempt Crenshaw was shot and died.
- Reed was indicted on multiple counts including aggravated murder, murder, aggravated robbery, and felonious assault with firearm specifications; later reindicted and ultimately pleaded guilty to amended counts: involuntary manslaughter and aggravated robbery (firearm specs deleted).
- Plea agreement required Reed to testify truthfully at codefendant trials; Reed testified at Pittman’s trial as required.
- During plea colloquies and two waivers of speedy trial Reed repeatedly disclosed she was on medication for anxiety/depression/bipolar disorder and stated the medication did not impair her understanding.
- At sentencing the court imposed concurrent indefinite terms under the Reagan Tokes Law (minimum 4 years, maximum 6 years) and imposed postrelease control; Reed appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether counsel was ineffective for not seeking a competency evaluation before plea/sentencing | State: counsel not deficient; record lacks indicia of incompetence; Reed repeatedly affirmed understanding and assisted counsel; no prejudice shown | Reed: counsel should have moved for competency/psych evaluation given diagnoses and medication | Court: Overruled; no sufficient indicia of incompetence, counsel not deficient, and Reed failed to show prejudice under Strickland |
| Whether sentencing under Reagan Tokes violates Sixth/Fourteenth Amendments or Ohio Constitution | State: Reagan Tokes valid; court bound by en banc Delvallie upholding the statute | Reed: Reagan Tokes unconstitutional (deprivation of jury/constitutional rights) | Court: Overruled; sentence under Reagan Tokes upheld pursuant to State v. Delvallie |
Key Cases Cited
- McMann v. Richardson, 397 U.S. 759 (ineffective-assistance framework supports right to competent counsel)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (two-prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- State v. Bradley, 42 Ohio St.3d 136 (Ohio adoption of Strickland standard)
- 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 inquiry when sufficient indicia of incompetence exist)
- Drope v. Missouri, 420 U.S. 162 (competency inquiry required when record shows reasonable doubt about competency)
- State v. Bock, 28 Ohio St.3d 108 (mental illness or psychotropic medication does not necessarily establish incompetence)
- State v. Mink, 101 Ohio St.3d 350 (competency standard applies equally to pleas)
- State v. Eley, 77 Ohio St.3d 174 (failure to hold competency hearing is harmless absent indicia of incompetence)
- State v. Jordan, 101 Ohio St.3d 216 (burden on defendant to prove incompetence)
- State v. Ketterer, 111 Ohio St.3d 70 (taking prescribed psychotropic drugs does not negate competence)