State v. Stull
2014 Ohio 1336
Ohio Ct. App.2014Background
- Rachel Stull lived at 721 Victoria Avenue with her daughter and on/off boyfriend Solomon Stallings. A SWAT search on Oct. 19, 2010, resulted in officers seeing Stallings toss a bag containing heroin, cocaine, and marijuana from a second‑floor window; drugs, scales, cash, and other items were found in the master bedroom. Stull impeded officers on the stairs during entry.
- Stull was tried separately from Stallings and convicted by a jury of possession of heroin, cocaine, marijuana, possession of drug paraphernalia, and child endangering; sentenced to 60 days jail and three years community control.
- After conviction Stull took a polygraph and then filed a petition for post‑conviction relief asserting ineffective assistance of trial counsel and an equal‑protection challenge to R.C. 2953.21(A)(1)(a)’s DNA‑only actual‑innocence provision.
- Trial court denied the petition without a hearing; on appeal the Ninth District ultimately affirmed the denial and ordered costs taxed to appellant.
- The ineffective‑assistance claims alleged counsel failed to (1) challenge the search warrant, (2) introduce receipts explaining cash found under the bed, and (3) call co‑defendant Stallings as a trial witness.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether counsel was ineffective for not moving to suppress the search warrant | Stull: affidavit did not establish probable cause to search her home (only showed a sale in the driveway) | State: affidavit from narcotics detective described a CI purchase from the premises and corroborating facts tying Stallings to the address, supplying probable cause | Court: affidavit provided substantial basis for probable cause; no prejudice shown from failure to move to suppress — claim overruled |
| Whether counsel was ineffective for not introducing receipts explaining cash under bed | Stull: $500 under bed was for a tanning conference; receipts would have exculpated her | State: other inculpating evidence (scales, >$1,200 cash, drugs thrown from bedroom, heroin in cell phone) made receipts unlikely to change verdict | Court: no reasonable probability of different result; claim overruled |
| Whether counsel was ineffective for not calling Stallings to testify | Stull: Stallings would have testified drugs were his and she had no knowledge; affidavit submitted | State: Stallings had prior convictions, pleaded guilty in this case, and had long intimate relationship with Stull — calling him posed risks | Court: strategic decision; strong presumption of reasonableness for counsel’s choice; claim overruled |
| Whether R.C. 2953.21(A)(1)(a)’s limitation of "actual innocence" relief to DNA evidence violates equal protection by excluding polygraph evidence | Stull: no rational basis for treating polygraph differently from DNA; cites a trial court decision admitting polygraph under reliability showing | State: legislature may rationally limit post‑conviction actual‑innocence petitions to DNA; polygraph here was labeled non‑evidentiary and no proof of comparable reliability was presented | Court: rational‑basis review applies; statute survives; Stull’s polygraph report not suitable evidentiary proof — claim overruled |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (standard for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (1983) (probable cause for search warrants judged on totality of the circumstances)
- State v. George, 45 Ohio St.3d 325 (1989) (Ohio test for reviewing magistrate’s probable‑cause finding)
- State v. Gondor, 112 Ohio St.3d 377 (2006) (standard of review for post‑conviction petition denials)
- Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (1983) (abuse of discretion definition)
- State v. Bloomer, 122 Ohio St.3d 200 (2009) (presumption of constitutionality for statutes)