State v. Seymour, 2014 Ohio 72

Defendant Seymour appealed a seven-year sentence after remand for allied-offenses error.
Original indictment included domestic violence, aggravated burglary, two assaults, grand theft, failure to comply, and violation of a protection order.
Appellant pled guilty July 5, 2011; total sentence was 13 years 6 months, with aggravated burglary driving six years.
On remand (July 9, 2012), allied-offenses error under Johnson was addressed; state chose aggravated burglary; other counts merged.
Resentencing increased the term from six to seven years, but the trial court provided no rationale for the increase; remand required if increase occurred.
Court ultimately reversed and remanded for new resentencing with explicit justification.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Pearce vindictiveness presumption applies after Johnson remand.	Seymour argues presumption applies due to remand.	Seymour contends vindictiveness may be presumed after remand.	Presumption applies; remand required justification for increase.
Whether increased seven-year sentence was justified by record evidence.	Record lacked new justifications for harsher sentence.	State asserts increased term supported by offense factors.	Increase not justified; remand for justification required.
Whether remand for resentencing is necessary to cure due-process defect.	Remand appropriate to supply reasoning.	Remand unnecessary if increased sentence supported.	Remand required to provide explicit reasons for any harsher sentence.
Whether Johnson remand context distinguishes Pearce considerations.	Johnson remand should not bar Pearce analysis.	Johnson remand different; Pearce may apply.	Johnson remand does not foreclose Pearce vindictiveness analysis.

State v. Pearce, 395 U.S. 711 (U.S. Supreme Court, 1969) (vindictiveness after successful appeal; due process constraints)
State v. Craycraft, 2012-Ohio-884 (Ohio 2012 (12th Dist.)) (Pearce issue in Johnson remands; vindictiveness inquiry limited)
State v. Collins, 2013-Ohio-938 (Ohio 2013) (vindictiveness presumption and remand guidance)
State v. Johnson, 128 Ohio St.3d 153 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2010) (Johnson test for merging offenses under R.C. 2941.25)
State v. Foster, 109 Ohio St.3d 1 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2006) (structural change to sentencing constraints; remand context)
Wasman v. United States, 468 U.S. 559 (U.S. Supreme Court, 1984) (preservation of a direct case for resentencing; use of new information)