State v. Swartz
2020 Ohio 5037
Ohio Ct. App.2020Background:
- Nathan A. Swartz was indicted on one count of rape (first-degree) and two counts of sexual battery (third-degree) for sexual acts with his daughter, occurring in various overlapping windows in 2018; DNA confirmed paternity of a child conceived in 2018.
- Defense moved for a competency determination; the court-ordered forensic evaluation by Dr. De Marchis concluded Swartz was competent and not insane; both parties stipulated to that report at the competency hearing.
- Nine days after the competency hearing Swartz pled no contest to all three counts with an agreed recommendation for concurrent sentences; court warned it was not bound by the recommendation and informed Swartz of maximum exposure.
- At sentencing the court relied on the PSI and the victim’s statement, found recidivism likely and multiple seriousness factors, merged Count 2 into Count 1, and imposed 11 years on Count 1 and three years concurrent on Count 3, plus PRC and Tier III registration.
- Swartz appealed raising three assignments: (1) trial court erred in finding competency, (2) the court should have merged all allied offenses (Count 3), and (3) ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to seek merger and to move to waive court costs.
Issues:
| Issue | State's Argument | Swartz's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Competency to stand trial/plead | Competency finding supported by uncontested forensic report showing ability to understand proceedings and assist counsel | Swartz claimed longstanding mental illness and that use of inmate "kites" showed inability to assist or to follow correct procedures | Court affirmed competency; no abuse of discretion relying on the stipulated forensic report and Swartz’s plea hearing responses |
| Allied-offense merger (Count 3) | Counts charged separate acts (different date ranges); separate harm and animus permit multiple convictions | Count 3 involved same victim and same manner of conduct and should have merged with Count 1 | Court held Count 3 involved separate acts/dates and separate animus/harm; merger not required |
| Ineffective assistance (failure to move to merge; failure to seek waiver of costs) | Counsel’s failure to move to merge was not deficient because merger would be futile; indigency alone unlikely to produce waiver of costs | Counsel was ineffective for not moving to merge and for not requesting waiver of court costs | Court rejected ineffective-assistance claim: no deficient performance/prejudice as merger motion would fail and waiver of costs was not likely |
Key Cases Cited
- Dusky v. United States, 362 U.S. 402 (establishes competency standard: factual and rational understanding and ability to consult with counsel)
- Godinez v. Moran, 509 U.S. 389 (competency standard applies to pleas)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (ineffective-assistance two-prong standard)
- State v. Bradley, 42 Ohio St.3d 136 (Ohio adoption of Strickland)
- State v. Ruff, 143 Ohio St.3d 114 (focus on defendant’s conduct for allied-offense analysis)
- State v. Earley, 145 Ohio St.3d 281 (three-question allied-offense framework)
- State v. Berry, 72 Ohio St.3d 354 (due-process competency principles)