State v. Rickard
2016 Ohio 3374
Ohio Ct. App.2016Background
- In 2014 a jury convicted Cody Ross Rickard of murder, two counts of aggravated vehicular homicide, two counts of felonious assault, and two counts of vehicular assault; he received an aggregate 29-year sentence. This court affirmed the convictions on direct appeal in 2015.
- Rickard filed a post-conviction petition (or alternative motion for new trial) claiming ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to investigate or present a mental‑defect/insanity defense; the trial court denied relief.
- The incident: Rickard drove around road‑closure barricades, struck two poles, and struck several CSX employees standing by a truck; one victim died and others were seriously injured.
- Witness and medical records showed highly unusual, erratic, and hallucinatory behavior by Rickard at the scene and in the hospital (e.g., delirious statements, celebratory behavior, violent/sexualized conduct while restrained).
- For post‑conviction support, Rickard submitted affidavits (his own, family/friends) and a psychologist’s affidavit describing premonitions, hallucinations, and medical notes documenting his altered mental state; trial counsel did not seek a mental evaluation or pursue an insanity defense at trial.
- The appellate court held the trial court abused its discretion: counsel’s failure to investigate mental health constituted ineffective assistance and there was a reasonable probability that a jury presented with mental‑defect evidence would reach a different result; the case was reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Rickard's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate/present a mental‑defect/insanity defense | Counsel failed to investigate obvious signs of psychosis/hallucination and ignored Rickard’s reports; no evaluation or NGRI option was explored | Counsel’s conduct did not prejudice the outcome; case concerned traffic/criminal facts, not mental disease | Court held counsel’s failure to investigate created a presumption of prejudice; reasonable probability of different result; reversed and remanded |
Key Cases Cited
- Bradley v. State, 42 Ohio St.3d 136, 538 N.E.2d 373 (Ohio 1989) (standard for ineffective assistance in Ohio)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (two‑prong test for counsel deficiency and prejudice)
- Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217, 450 N.E.2d 1140 (Ohio 1983) (abuse of discretion standard)
- Gondor v. State, 112 Ohio St.3d 377 (Ohio 2006) (post‑conviction relief construed narrowly to provide finality)
- Johnson v. State, 24 Ohio St.3d 87, 494 N.E.2d 1061 (Ohio 1986) (total lack of reasonable investigation can give rise to presumption of prejudice)
- Filiaggi v. State, 86 Ohio St.3d 230, 714 N.E.2d 867 (Ohio 1999) (burden to prove insanity by preponderance)
- Lytle v. State, 48 Ohio St.2d 391, 358 N.E.2d 623 (Ohio 1976) (cited in Bradley regarding counsel performance)
- Vaughn v. Maxwell, 2 Ohio St.2d 299, 209 N.E.2d 164 (Ohio 1965) (presumption a licensed attorney is competent)
- Michael v. Louisiana, 350 U.S. 91 (U.S. 1955) (noting counsel decisions may be viewed as trial strategy)