State v. Steinfurth
2012 Ohio 3257
Ohio Ct. App.2012Background
- Steinfurth stole a Motorola Droid 2 Global from a Verizon store on May 4, 2011, valued at $589.99, and was chased by police for about 25 minutes before being detained.
- The Cuyahoga County Grand Jury indicted Steinfurth on June 10, 2011 on multiple counts, including theft, obstructing official business, breaking and entering, and resisting arrest.
- By a negotiated plea, Steinfurth pled guilty on September 13, 2011 to aggravated theft (a fifth-degree felony) and resisting arrest (a second-degree misdemeanor) with the other counts dismissed.
- Between the plea and sentencing, House Bill 86 (HB 86) amended the theft statute and became effective September 30, 2011, potentially altering how violations would be classified and punished.
- At sentencing on October 13, 2011, the court stated the new law applied, treating the offense as a misdemeanor for sentencing purposes, but defense counsel objected, and the court maintained the conviction as a felony while noting the new sentencing framework.
- The trial court imposed restitution of $589.99, a six-month sentence for theft, and a 90-day sentence for resisting arrest, suspended on probation for two years.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether HB 86 amendments applied to reduce Steinfurth's offense from felony to misdemeanor | Steinfurth contends the offense should be a misdemeanor under HB 86. | Steinfurth argues the offense should reflect the post-HB 86 misdemeanor classification for sentencing. | First assignment overruled; conviction remains a fifth-degree felony, but sentencing benefited via 1.58. |
| Whether defense counsel was ineffective for not requesting a plea after HB 86 | Steinfurth asserts ineffective assistance due to uncured timing for HB 86. | Steinfurth argues failure to delay plea post-HB 86 prejudiced him. | Second assignment overruled; counsel's conduct not deemed ineffective given the controlling date of the offense. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Clemons, 2011-Ohio-1177 (7th Dist. Ohio) (applies 1.58 to reduce punishment when amended statute after offense)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. Supreme Court 1984) (standard for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- Parra, 2011-Ohio-3977 (8th Dist. Ohio) (deferential review of counsel conduct; futile motions not ineffective)