State v. Stevens, 2020 Ohio 1300

Michael E. Stevens withdrew his not-guilty pleas during trial and pleaded guilty pursuant to plea agreements in two related Muskingum County cases (CR2019-0025 and CR2019-0225).
Plea terms: State dismissed two counts and repeat specifications in CR2019-0025; both parties reserved sentencing arguments; Stevens expressly agreed to pay restitution ($994.18 in CR2019-0025; unspecified amount in CR2019-0225).
The trial court conducted a detailed plea colloquy, confirmed Stevens' understanding of restitution and court costs, and accepted the guilty pleas.
At sentencing the court merged counts, sentenced under the robbery counts: 60 months in CR2019-0225 and a mandatory 8 years in CR2019-0025, ordered to run consecutively for an aggregate 13-year term, citing Stevens' criminal history and need to protect the public.
Stevens appealed, raising three assignments of error: (1) consecutive sentences unlawful; (2) plain error in ordering restitution without ability-to-pay inquiry; (3) ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to object to restitution and failing to request waiver of court costs.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether consecutive sentences were lawful	State: trial court complied with R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) and sentencing statutes; record supports findings	Stevens: trial court's findings do not support consecutive terms	Court: Affirmed — sentencing findings supported; no clear-and-convincing basis to vacate consecutive sentences
Whether ordering restitution without explicit ability-to-pay inquiry was plain error	State: restitution was part of plea bargain; defendant agreed, so no plain error	Stevens: trial court erred by ordering restitution without considering ability to pay	Court: Denied — invited-error doctrine bars review because Stevens expressly agreed to restitution in plea colloquy
Whether counsel was ineffective for not objecting to restitution or seeking waiver of costs	State: counsel’s failure to object or seek cost waiver was a reasonable, strategic choice tied to plea benefits; no prejudice shown	Stevens: counsel failed essential duties; prior indigency findings made waiver likely, so prejudice probable	Court: Denied — counsel’s conduct fell within reasonable professional judgment; no reasonable probability outcome would differ

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishes two-prong ineffective-assistance test)
Lockhart v. Fretwell, 506 U.S. 364 (prejudice inquiry in ineffective-assistance claims)
State v. Bradley, 538 N.E.2d 373 (Ohio standard for ineffective assistance analysis)
State v. Hairston, 888 N.E.2d 1073 (proportionality review focuses on individual sentences)
Cross v. Ledford, 120 N.E.2d 118 (definition of clear and convincing evidence)
State v. Threatt, 843 N.E.2d 164 (prior rule on finality of cost waiver; discussed in context of R.C. 2947.23 changes)
State v. Dean, 54 N.E.3d 80 (both deficient performance and prejudice required for reversal)