State v. Thomas, 2014 Ohio 5262

Thomas convicted of felonious assault (serious harm) in Montgomery County after a joint trial with Saleh and Qualls.
Motion to suppress his statements from custodial interrogation at a high school was denied; Miranda rights properly advised per the court.
Trial court conducted a bench trial on sentencing and found Thomas actively participated in an ambush causing serious harm to Schwarz.
Thomas sentenced to four years in prison with restitution of $6,612.17 joint and several with codefendants.
Thomas argues the suppression ruling and the four-year sentence are unlawful; the State cross-appears not to challenge the conviction.
Court of Appeals affirms both conviction and sentence, holding the suppression ruling was proper and the sentence not contrary to law.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was the suppression motion properly overruled?	Thomas; suppression should fail given proper Mirandizing and voluntary waiver.	Thomas; custodial interrogation of a minor-like high school student coerced and not properly Mirandized.	Overruled; waiver and Mirandization were proper; statements admissible.
Is the four-year sentence contrary to law or an abuse of discretion?	State; sentence within range and proper given aggravating factors.	Thomas; factors do not justify four years; presumption for prison may be misapplied and less restrictive options exist.	Not contrary to law; within statutory range and supported by the record; no abuse of discretion.

State v. Kalish, 120 Ohio St.3d 23 (Ohio 2008) (two-step sentencing review framework; Kalish guides reliance on statutory factors)
State v. Rodeffer, 5 N.E.3d 1069 (2d Dist. 2013) (abandons Kalish two-step; adopts 2953.08(G)(2) standard for sentence review)
State v. Carlton, 2014-Ohio-3835 (2d Dist. 2014) (silence on record may support consideration of sentencing factors)