State v. Williams
2012 Ohio 107
Ohio Ct. App.2012Background
- Williams, convicted of rape in 2006, is subject to the SORN registration/notification duties.
- In April 2009 he was charged with failing to notify of a change in residence after release.
- On remand from an appellate reversal, the trial court found Williams moved from Edgar Avenue and stayed at Kirkham Street prior to notifying, with later indication he also lived at Kipling Avenue.
- Parole officer Langer instructed Williams to find another residence; Williams failed to timely notify after learning his Edgar Avenue address was no longer accurate.
- The trial court concluded the impossibility defense failed because Williams did not notify on the first business day after learning of the change, and he was convicted; the court did not apply the impossibility defense.
- On appeal, Williams contests ineffective assistance, sufficiency/weight of the evidence, and the sentencing under Megan’s Law vs. Adam Walsh Act, leading to partial reversal and remand for resentencing under former law.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance of counsel | Williams argues counsel failed to present key impossibility defense evidence. | Williams contends counsel’s omissions deprived him of a viable impossibility defense. | First assignment overruled |
| Legal sufficiency and weight of the impossibility defense | Evidence shows it was impossible to notify due to officer actions and Williams’ lack of approvals. | Evidence does not establish a legally sufficient or weighty impossibility defense. | Third assignment overruled; conviction supported and weight not against verdict |
| Sentencing under Megan's Law vs Adam Walsh Act | Post-Milby, penalties should be under Megan’s Law; AWA penalties may be unconstitutional for Williams. | Current penalties under AWA apply to Williams’ 2009 offense and classification. | Sentence vacated and remanded to apply former Megan’s Law penalties |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Poole, 33 Ohio St.2d 18 (Ohio 1973) (affirmative defense is a substantive exemption from liability)
- State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (Ohio 1997) (distinguishes sufficiency vs weight of the evidence)
- State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (Ohio 1991) (standard for sufficiency of the evidence)
- State v. Bodyke, 126 Ohio St.3d 266 (Ohio 2010) (unaltered Megan’s Law classifications post-Bodyke)