State v. Williams, 2012 Ohio 4708

Defendant Ernest Williams, III was convicted by bench trial of two trafficking counts, one possession count, and one tampering count related to heroin transactions in 2011.
Confidential informant purchased heroin from Williams on August 31 and September 6, 2011; surveillance showed Williams toss a baggie after the September 6 sale.
The baggie contained 28 doses of heroin; total September 6 incident involved 32 doses in Williams' possession, with 5 doses sold to the informant.
Williams received consecutive sentences for the counts; merger of counts two and three was not challenged at sentencing.
On appeal, Williams argues Counts 2 and 3 are allied offenses that must merge under R.C. 2941.25; the trial court findings on merger are reviewed for plain error.
The court held Williams’ September 6, 2011 possession and trafficking counts were separate occurrences with different animus, thus not subject to merger.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether trafficking and possession counts merge	Williams argues counts 2 and 3 are allied offenses needing merger.	Williams contends the same conduct supported both offenses with same act.	No merger; separate occurrences with distinct animus.

State v. Cabrales, 118 Ohio St.3d 54 (2008-Ohio-1625) (distinguishes possession vs. trafficking for allied-offense analysis)
State v. Johnson, 128 Ohio St.3d 153 (2010-Ohio-6314) (adopts conduct-based approach to merger; clarifies Johnson framework)
State v. Elmore, 111 Ohio St.3d 515 (2006-Ohio-6207) (plain-error standard for failure to merge not raised at trial)
State v. Underwood, 124 Ohio St.3d 365 (2010-Ohio-1) (establishes when allied-offense error prejudices defendant)