State v. Smith, 2017 Ohio 463

Background

Thomas A. Smith, Jr. was driving a stolen car at >100 mph while intoxicated, with seven passengers; the car crashed, killing three passengers and severely injuring four (only the seat-belted passenger avoided serious injury).
Smith was indicted on 17 counts; he pled guilty to three counts of aggravated vehicular homicide (first-degree felonies), two counts of aggravated vehicular assault (third-degree felonies, as amended), and one count of DUI (first-degree misdemeanor); remaining counts nolled.
Trial court sentenced Smith to an aggregate 23-year prison term (consecutive individual terms), run consecutive to two other cases for a total of 25 years, plus five years postrelease control, restitution, and lifetime license suspension.
Smith appealed, raising three assignments of error: (1) plea defective under Crim.R. 11 because of misstatement of Count 3’s degree; (2) ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to investigate mental health or request competency evaluation; (3) sentence contrary to law (failure to consider factors, findings for consecutive terms, and notice of appeal).
Record showed plea colloquy correctly identified Count 3 as a first-degree felony and the court properly advised Smith of charges and penalties; only the journal entries mistakenly listed Count 3 as a second-degree felony.
The trial court heard mitigation, reviewed the presentence investigation, made and incorporated consecutive-sentence findings, and the sentencing terms were within statutory ranges.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Smith)	Held
Whether plea complied with Crim.R. 11 and was knowingly, intelligently, voluntarily entered	Court properly advised Smith of nature and maximum penalties; plea and colloquy were adequate	Plea invalid because Count 3 was mischaracterized (second-degree) in journal entries and Smith’s mental instability impaired voluntariness	Plea was valid; colloquy correctly stated Count 3 as a first-degree felony. Remand for nunc pro tunc entries to correct journal error
Whether trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by not investigating mental health or requesting competency evaluation	Counsel’s performance not deficient; record shows Smith made a reasoned plea and was articulate in colloquy	Counsel should have sought competency evaluation given Smith’s suicide watch, sleep deprivation, and reported instability	No ineffective assistance shown; Smith failed to prove prejudice from counsel’s actions
Whether sentence was contrary to law (failure to consider factors, improper consecutive sentences, lack of appeal notice)	Court considered required factors, reviewed reports, made and journalized consecutive-sentence findings; sentences within statutory ranges	Court failed to state findings on record for minimum, didn’t properly weigh factors, aggregate exceeds permissible	Sentence affirmed; court’s findings supported by record, sentencing within discretion; failure to advise of appeal was harmless (appeal timely filed)

Key Cases Cited

State ex rel. Womack v. Marsh, 943 N.E.2d 1010 (Ohio 2011) (nunc pro tunc entries may correct journal entries to reflect what occurred)
State v. Perez, 920 N.E.2d 104 (Ohio 2009) (Strickland standard explained for ineffective-assistance claims)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (two-prong ineffective assistance standard: deficiency and prejudice)
State v. Engle, 660 N.E.2d 450 (Ohio 1996) (plea must be knowing, intelligent, and voluntary)
State v. Bonnell, 16 N.E.3d 659 (Ohio 2014) (consecutive-sentence statutory findings must be made and incorporated in the entry)
State v. Mathis, 846 N.E.2d 1 (Ohio 2006) (trial court has discretion to impose any sentence within statutory range)
State v. Marcum, 59 N.E.3d 1231 (Ohio 2016) (appellate review under R.C. 2953.08(G)(2) requires clear-and-convincing standard)