State v. Smith, 2021 Ohio 1936

Background

On Nov. 6, 2017, two men (Bragg and Crawford) were the victims of an attempted carjacking/robbery after Bragg withdrew about $6,000 from a bank; a blue Cadillac and a woman (Montgomery) were connected to the incident. A struggle occurred; Bragg was cut and an envelope (empty) was taken.
Police recovered a cell phone and lighter near the driver’s side of Crawford’s car and swabbed the steering wheel and gearshift; DNA testing on the phone produced a mixed profile with appellant Brandon D. Smith as the major contributor. Other scene samples were inconclusive.
Appellant was indicted on multiple counts; the state later dismissed three counts. At trial the jury convicted Smith of aggravated robbery and robbery; the court merged counts and sentenced him to eight years’ imprisonment.
Post-trial, Smith raised (1) ineffective assistance of counsel (failure to object to peremptory challenge calculation; failure to assert an alibi and to call co-defendant Alls), (2) speedy-trial violations, and (3) insufficiency/manifest-weight of the evidence. The trial court denied relief and this appeal followed.
The court affirmed: it found no ineffective assistance (strategy decisions and no prejudice), Smith’s speedy-trial claim was waived/untimely and continuances by counsel counted against him, and the convictions were supported by sufficient evidence and not against the manifest weight.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Ineffective assistance of counsel (peremptory challenges; alibi/co-defendant testimony)	Counsel acted reasonably; the peremptory challenges were waived by mutual passes; strategic choices about witnesses/alibi were reasonable and not prejudicial	Counsel miscalculated remaining peremptories, failed to file alibi notice or call alibi/co-defendant witnesses, and relationship broke down	No deficient performance or prejudice shown. Under Crim.R. 24(E) alternating consecutive passes waived remaining peremptories; counsel’s decisions re: witnesses/alibi were trial strategy and will not be second‑guessed.
Speedy-trial claim	Trial was within limits or, alternatively, any delays were properly charged to defendant via counsel’s waivers/continuances; defendant’s oral motion during trial was untimely	Arrest-to-trial delay exceeded statutory limits (~>270 days); counsel waived without defendant’s consent; defendant raised claim at trial	Claim was untimely/forfeited: defendant failed to move "at or prior to commencement of trial" as required by R.C. 2945.73(B); many continuances were attributable to defense counsel, so no statutory violation found.
Sufficiency / manifest weight of the evidence	Victim identifications, accomplice testimony, and DNA (phone with Smith as major contributor) provided an adequate evidentiary basis	Pretrial/photo-array failures to ID, accomplice Montgomery unreliable, no DNA on steering wheel/gearshift undermines link to driving/commission	Jury verdict was not against the manifest weight; evidence—including in‑court ID, accomplice testimony (weighed by jury), and DNA on phone—was sufficient to support convictions.

Key Cases Cited

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (two‑prong test for ineffective assistance: deficient performance and prejudice)
Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 (U.S. 1972) (framework for constitutional speedy‑trial claims)
State v. Taylor, 98 Ohio St.3d 27 (Ohio 2002) (defendant must move to dismiss on speedy‑trial grounds prior to trial; counsel can waive speedy‑trial rights)
State v. McBreen, 54 Ohio St.2d 315 (Ohio 1978) (counsel may validly waive defendant's speedy‑trial right without defendant's consent)
State v. Jones, 160 Ohio St.3d 314 (Ohio 2020) (interpretation and limits on exercising/waving peremptory challenges under Crim.R. 24)
State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (Ohio 1997) (manifest‑weight review standard)
State v. DeHass, 10 Ohio St.2d 230 (Ohio 1967) (jury’s role in assessing witness credibility)