State v. Wallace
2017 Ohio 7322
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Wallace was charged by multicount indictment including unlawful sexual conduct with a minor and related offenses involving his 14-year-old goddaughter.
- Juror No. 13 revealed personal rape-history experiences but stated she could be impartial; defense and prosecution asked questions during voir dire.
- Juror No. 3 arose from juror 13 after voir dire; both sides used all remaining peremptory challenges, defense not using one on Juror No. 3.
- The jury convicted Wallace on count 6, unlawful sexual conduct with a minor, with the furthermore specification, and acquitted on other counts.
- Wallace argues counsel was ineffective for not using a peremptory challenge to excuse Juror No. 3, claiming bias against him.
- The trial court sentenced Wallace to one year in prison and ordered Tier II sexual-offender registration; judgment affirmed on appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance from not striking juror | Wallace | Wallace | No reversible error; counsel's choice was strategic and not prejudicial |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (establishes standard for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- State v. Mundt, 115 Ohio St.3d 22 (2007-Ohio-4836) (voir dire strategy; deference to trial counsel)
- State v. Mundy, 99 Ohio App.3d 275 (2d Dist.1994) (victims not necessarily biased if not still recovering)
- State v. McNeill, 83 Ohio St.3d 438 (1998) (peremptory challenges as trial strategy)
- State v. Powell, 132 Ohio St.3d 233 (2012-Ohio-2577) (requires showing prejudice with juror selection)
- State v. Jenkins, 2014-Ohio-3123 (4th Dist.Ross) (prejudice inquiry in ineffective assistance claims)