State v. Smith
2013 Ohio 1586
Ohio Ct. App.2013Background
- Smith was convicted at a second trial of two counts of Kidnapping and one count of Unlawful Restraint; conviction and sentence were previously reversed in a prior appeal.
- Smith proceeded pro se at trial with a standby attorney; the court conducted extensive voir dire and explained differences in civil vs. criminal proof standards to jurors.
- Prospective juror No. 11, an immigrant with a thick accent, was challenged for cause and excused after the court sustained the challenge under R.C. 2945.25(N); the State had used all peremptory challenges.
- On appeal, Smith challenged the cause ruling as erroneous, arguing it violated equal protection by excluding a juror based on national origin/English fluency.
- The trial court later classified Smith as a Tier II sex offender/child victim offender, a designation the State conceded was improper given no sexual motivation evidence.
- The court also had amended the judgment entry to waive fines and costs, raising concerns about authority to amend after judgment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the exclusion for cause of juror 11 was improper | Smith (through counsel) contends exclusion based on accent/native language violated equal protection. | State argues harmless error or permissible given trial court discretion in cause challenges. | Erroneous excusal for cause sustained; equal protection violated |
| Whether Smith’s Tier II designation should be reversed | No evidence of sexual motivation, so Tier II designation inappropriate. | State concedes lack of sexual motivation evidence; designation potentially supports safety and public interest. | Tier II designation reversed; moot regarding other issues |
| Whether the court costs were properly imposed and/or amended | Amendment to judgment entry imposing costs after sentencing is improper. | Costs were waived/adjusted; record insufficient to show final denial of costs. | Court costs issue sustained; amendment improper |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Sanders, 92 Ohio St.3d 245, 750 N.E.2d 90 (2001) (erroneous exclusion for cause not cognizable unless it affects right to jury; equal protection concerns)
- Powers v. Ohio, 499 U.S. 400, 111 S.Ct. 1364 (1991) (standing to vindicate juror not to be discriminated against under equal protection)
- City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center, 473 U.S. 432, 105 S.Ct. 3249 (1985) (equal protection concerns when classification based on alienage/national origin)
- State v. Speer, 124 Ohio St.3d 564, 2010-Ohio-649 (2010) (acknowledges non-discrimination in jury service; equal protection/government use of juries)