State v. Smith
2019 Ohio 4671
Ohio Ct. App.2019Background
- In August 2017 two victims were robbed of a purse and a car after one of the perpetrators said “give me your keys or I’ll shoot you in the f*ing head.” Victims did not actually see a gun; none was recovered.
- Sixteen-year-old Nicholas Smith was charged in juvenile court on eight counts (including aggravated robbery, grand theft, failure to comply, and weapons-under-disability counts) and several firearm specifications.
- At a juvenile probable-cause hearing the court found probable cause for two aggravated-robbery counts and grand theft, but not for several other counts or that Smith possessed a firearm; the court later held an amenability hearing and transferred the case to adult court (discretionary bindover).
- Smith was indicted in adult court on the full set of counts, pled guilty to amended aggravated robbery (with a one-year firearm specification), amended grand theft, failure to comply, and escape; other counts were nolled; he received an aggregate nine-year prison sentence.
- Smith appealed raising three assignments: (1) juvenile probable cause for aggravated robbery was insufficient because there was no gun; (2) the adult court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction over counts the juvenile court found lacked probable cause; and (3) counsel was ineffective for failing to object to those counts. The appellate court affirmed on all issues but remanded for a nunc pro tunc correction of the sentencing entry’s postrelease-control language.
Issues
| Issue | State's Argument | Smith's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Probable cause for aggravated robbery (juvenile bindover) | Verbal threat to shoot supports an inference of a deadly weapon and raises more than mere suspicion. | Juvenile court lacked sufficient credible evidence that Smith had a gun, so probable cause for aggravated robbery was lacking. | Probable cause existed: victims’ testimony that an assailant threatened to shoot supports inference of a weapon; assignment overruled. |
| Subject-matter jurisdiction in adult court for counts juvenile court found lacked probable cause | Once juvenile court transfers the case under R.C. 2152.12(I), jurisdiction in adult court attaches to the whole transferred complaint; counts arising from the same course of conduct may be tried in adult court even if juvenile court said no probable cause for some counts. | Counts the juvenile court found lacked probable cause (and the gun spec) were effectively dismissed, so adult court lacked jurisdiction to indict/convict on them. | Adult court had jurisdiction over all transferred counts (course-of-conduct and R.C. 2152.12(I)); assignment overruled. |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to object to indictment/convictions on those counts | No meritorious jurisdictional objection existed because adult court had jurisdiction; counsel not deficient. | Counsel was ineffective for failing to seek dismissal based on juvenile-court findings. | Counsel not ineffective under Strickland/Bradley because there was no reasonable probability of a different result. Assignment overruled. |
| Sentencing entry’s postrelease-control language | Trial court properly gave oral advisals at sentencing. | Sentencing journal entry omitted required Grimes elements. | Court affirmed but remanded for limited nunc pro tunc correction of the journal entry to reflect proper postrelease-control advisals. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re A.J.S., 897 N.E.2d 629 (Ohio 2008) (juvenile bindover: de novo review of sufficiency of evidence for probable cause and defer to juvenile court on credibility)
- State v. Iacona, 752 N.E.2d 937 (Ohio 2001) (probable-cause standard: more than mere suspicion but less than proof beyond a reasonable doubt)
- State v. Wilson, 652 N.E.2d 196 (Ohio 1995) (absent proper bindover, adult court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction; conviction void)
- State v. Grimes, 85 N.E.3d 700 (Ohio 2017) (sentencing entry must state whether postrelease control is mandatory or discretionary, its duration, and that APA will administer it)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (two-prong ineffective-assistance test: deficient performance and prejudice)
- State v. Bradley, 538 N.E.2d 373 (Ohio 1989) (applying Strickland in Ohio)
- State v. Boyce, 486 N.E.2d 1246 (Ohio Ct. App. 1985) (weapon presence may be inferred from surrounding evidence)
- State v. Mays, 18 N.E.3d 850 (Ohio Ct. App. 2014) (offenses arising from same course of conduct may be transferred together to adult court)
- State v. Bonnell, 16 N.E.3d 659 (Ohio 2014) (nunc pro tunc may correct clerical mistakes but not alter what did not occur)