State v. Stevens, 2017 Ohio 5482

Defendant Mark L. Stevens set fire to his home, destroying the house and contents; his wife suffered substantial financial loss and submitted a victim-impact statement valuing losses over $200,000.
After the arson, Stevens went to a bar with a loaded firearm and was arrested for illegal possession of a firearm on liquor-permit premises (third-degree felony).
He was separately indicted on two counts of aggravated arson (first- and second-degree felonies); he pled no contest to all three counts; the aggravated-arson counts were merged and the State elected sentencing on the first-degree count.
Trial court sentenced Stevens to 11 years imprisonment for aggravated arson and concurrent 12 months for the firearm offense; the court ordered $196,000 in restitution to the wife.
On appeal Stevens raised three assignments of error: (1) indictments are void for not showing a finding of probable cause on their face; (2) the 11-year maximum sentence is excessive; (3) the restitution order is improper because he lacks ability to pay.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Indictment facially void for lack of probable-cause finding	State: indictment valid without an express on-face PC finding	Stevens: indictment should indicate grand jury probable-cause finding on its face	Court: indictment need not show PC finding on its face; no timely trial objection waived; assignment overruled
Sentence excessive / abuse of discretion	State: sentence within statutory range and supported by record factors	Stevens: 11-year maximum unjust given first felony, mitigating facts, and not worst-level offense	Court: review under R.C. 2953.08(G)(2); record supports sentencing considerations (seriousness, lack of remedial action, public protection); not clearly and convincingly contrary to law; assignment overruled
Restitution excessive / inability to pay	State: restitution authorized and based on victim’s loss and PSI	Stevens: cannot pay due to disability, no assets, incarceration; court failed to make findings on ability to pay	Court: trial court considered ability to pay during colloquy and PSI; Stevens did not object at sentencing or argue plain error on appeal; restitution order not overturned

Ex parte United States, 287 U.S. 241 (finding a facially fair indictment by a grand jury conclusively determines probable cause)
State v. Buehner, 110 Ohio St.3d 403 (2006) (indictment’s purposes: notice and protection against double jeopardy)
State v. Marcum, 146 Ohio St.3d 516 (2016) (standard of appellate review for felony sentences under R.C. 2953.08)
State v. Horner, 126 Ohio St.3d 466 (2010) (defects in indictment forfeited if not timely raised)
State v. Foster, 109 Ohio St.3d 1 (2006) (trial courts have discretion to impose sentences within statutory range without specific findings)
Cross v. Ledford, 161 Ohio St. 469 (1954) (definition of clear and convincing evidence)
Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (1983) (abuse-of-discretion standard defined)