State v. Sharp, 2020 Ohio 3497

In 2009 Sharp was convicted by a jury of kidnapping and felonious assault for abducting and repeatedly beating a victim; DNA and eyewitness evidence supported the convictions.
The trial court sentenced Sharp to an aggregate 16-year prison term (three years less than the state sought), after considering statutory factors and within applicable sentencing ranges.
Nine years later the original trial judge in an unrelated case recused himself, citing possible implicit bias arising from a family-member victimization; the prosecutor notified defendants previously sentenced by that judge, including Sharp.
Sharp sought leave to file a delayed motion for a new trial and argued the original judge had been biased and that he was entitled to resentencing before an unbiased judge.
An Ohio Supreme Court–appointed judge granted leave but denied the motion for a new trial, finding no prejudice from the original judge; Sharp appealed, arguing ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to file a separate motion for new sentencing.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Sharp received ineffective assistance when counsel did not file a separate motion for resentencing	Counsel was deficient for not filing a new-sentencing motion after later-disclosed possible judicial bias; resentencing could produce a different result	No prejudice: sentencing was lawful, within guidelines, supported by record; Sharp had prior opportunities to raise bias and failed to show the judge was biased	Court affirmed: no ineffective assistance because Sharp cannot show a reasonable probability a resentencing motion would have succeeded or altered the result

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-prong ineffective-assistance standard: deficient performance and prejudice)
State v. Dean, 127 Ohio St.3d 140 (2010) (judicial bias defined; judges are presumptively impartial)