State v. Rojas
2022 Ohio 2333
Ohio Ct. App.2022Background
- On July 15, 2021, then‑17‑year‑old Rosalinda Rojas attacked T.A.D.D. with a machete at a state‑park campsite; the victim suffered life‑threatening injuries and required long surgery. Rojas had used LSD and was under its influence at the time.
- The state filed a juvenile delinquency complaint alleging acts that would be attempted murder, two counts of felonious assault, and misdemeanor assault.
- The state sought mandatory bindover under R.C. 2152.12 because Rojas was 16–17 and the complaint included attempted murder; the juvenile court granted the bindover.
- The common pleas court indicted Rojas on attempted murder; she later pled guilty to a reduced charge of second‑degree felonious assault.
- At sentencing the court imposed an indefinite Reagan‑Tokes sentence (6–9 years) and ordered restitution; Rojas appealed.
- The appellate court affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded: it found the adult court failed to apply the reverse‑bindover procedures of R.C. 2152.121 and remanded for compliance; ineffective‑assistance claims were rendered moot; Reagan‑Tokes challenges were forfeited and overruled on precedent.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Rojas) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the common pleas court erred by failing to apply R.C. 2152.121 (reverse‑bindover) before sentencing | The court committed plain error by not staying/returning the case to juvenile court under R.C. 2152.121(B)(3) | State conceded error as to failure to apply R.C. 2152.121 in this case | Court: Error; conviction reversed in part and case remanded for the common pleas court to consider and apply R.C. 2152.121; otherwise conviction affirmed |
| Whether Rojas received ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to raise R.C. 2152.121 below | Trial counsel failed to inform the court of R.C. 2152.121 and failed to object to sentencing without reverse‑bindover | State argued no prejudice or addressed on appeal | Court: Moot—because court already ordered remand to apply R.C. 2152.121, ineffective‑assistance claim dismissed |
| Whether the Reagan‑Tokes indefinite sentence is unconstitutional (jury right, separation of powers, due process) | Reagan‑Tokes violates jury trial, separation‑of‑powers, and due process rights | State maintained the statute is constitutional; additionally argued Rojas forfeited the claim by not raising it below | Court: Forfeited (not raised below) and therefore not considered; precedent rejects these constitutional challenges |
Key Cases Cited
- The opinion principally cites Ohio appellate decisions that are reported as district opinions or slip opinions. None of the authorities cited in this opinion were provided with official reporter citations in the opinion, so there are no key authorities with official reporter citations to list from this opinion.