State v. Ward, 2012 Ohio 1199

Ward was indicted on nine counts and pleaded guilty to three: rape with a sexual offender specification, felonious assault, and tampering with evidence; the other six counts were nolled.
The court imposed consecutive sentences: 10 years for rape, 5 years for felonious assault, and 5 years for tampering with evidence, total 20 years.
Ward appealed raising two assignments of error: (1) consecutive-sentencing issues under Kalish framework after Foster; (2) failure to merge allied offenses under Johnson and related standards.
The sentence existed before HB 86 took effect; Kalish framework applies to post-Foster review, with two-step analysis (lawful sentence first, then abuse of discretion).
The trial court acknowledged it considered R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12 factors, and Ward had recidivism concerns; record showed opportunities to withdraw the plea regarding potential consecutiveness, which Ward declined.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Consecutive-sentencing compliance under Kalish	Ward argues lack of required findings under R.C. 2929.14.	Ward contends improper consecutive sentences.	Sentence not contrary to law; court did not abuse discretion.
Allied offenses merger at sentencing	State contends offenses are not allied; plea not silent on allied-offenses issue.	Ward argues offenses could be allied; merger required.	Not error; offenses not allied under Johnson; three offenses not merged.

State v. Kalish, 120 Ohio St.3d 23 (2008-Ohio-4912) (two-step Kalish framework for post-Foster sentencing review)
State v. Foster, 109 Ohio St.3d 1 (2006-Ohio-856) (mandatory judicial fact-finding eliminated; discretion vesting to court)
State v. Mathis, 109 Ohio St.3d 54 (2006-Ohio-855) (statutory range and considerations; limits of fact-finding)
State v. Johnson, 128 Ohio St.3d 153 (2010-Ohio-6314) (redefines allied offenses; same-conduct test applied)
State v. Underwood, 124 Ohio St.3d 365 (2010-Ohio-1922) (waiver of allied-offenses issue when stipulation exists)