State v. Williams, 2018 Ohio 1297

In April 2016 Timothy Williams (age ~21) shot a friend multiple times at point-blank range; the victim was hospitalized over a month and had prolonged recovery.
Williams was reindicted in Dec. 2016 on attempted murder and two felonious-assault counts with firearm specifications; he pled guilty in March 2017 to an amended count of felonious assault (R.C. 2903.11(A)(1)), a second-degree felony, with a one-year firearm spec; other counts were nolled.
The felonious-assault plea was packaged with a separate drug-possession guilty plea; Williams had recent juvenile adjudications and adult drug convictions and was on community-control supervision when he committed the shooting.
At joint sentencing the trial court imposed 7 years for felonious assault plus 1 year for the firearm spec (consecutive) for an aggregate 8-year prison term; drug-possession sentence ran concurrent.
The trial court did not calculate or state any jail-time (credit for time served) in the sentencing entry. Williams appealed, raising three assignments of error: (1) failure to award jail-time credit, (2) sentence excessive/abuse of discretion, and (3) failure to consider youth as mitigating factor.
The appellate court affirmed the sentence on the merits but found plain error in failing to calculate jail-time credit and remanded for the trial court to determine and include that credit.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Williams)	Held
Whether the trial court erred by failing to determine and include jail-time credit	Trial court’s omission was not raised below; but jail-time credit is addressed by statute and must be calculated by court	Trial court failed to grant or make findings on jail-time credit	Court found plain error, sustained the claim, remanded for calculation and entry of jail-time credit
Whether the 8-year sentence for second-degree felonious assault was excessive / an abuse of discretion	Sentence within statutory range and supported by record (seriousness, criminal history, victim’s severe injury); sentencing court considered required factors	Sentence excessive given youth, remorse, perceived self-defense (victim had a gun)	Court overruled this assignment; sentence affirmed as supported by record and not contrary to law
Whether the trial court failed to consider Williams’s youth as a mitigating factor	Sentencing court considered youth and prior record; Williams was an adult at offense; cited juvenile-death/LWP cases inapplicable	Court failed to adequately weigh youth and developmental immaturity	Court rejected the argument; noted Williams was over 18, court referenced him as "young man," and record shows consideration of mitigation

State v. Fugate, 117 Ohio St.3d 261 (Ohio 2009) (equal-protection rationale for jail-time credit)
State ex rel. Rankin v. Ohio Adult Parole Auth., 98 Ohio St.3d 476 (Ohio 2003) (duty of trial judge to determine jail-time credit)
State v. Marcum, 146 Ohio St.3d 516 (Ohio 2016) (appellate review standard under R.C. 2953.08(G)(2))
State v. Kalish, 120 Ohio St.3d 23 (Ohio 2008) (discussed and clarified by Marcum regarding review standard)
State v. Wilson, 129 Ohio St.3d 214 (Ohio 2011) (no required talismanic language when considering R.C. 2929.11/2929.12 factors)
Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (U.S. 2005) (juvenile capital sentencing precedent cited as inapplicable)
Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (U.S. 2010) (juvenile life-without-parole precedent cited as inapplicable)
Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (U.S. 2012) (juvenile mandatory life-without-parole precedent cited as inapplicable)