State v. Workman
2017 Ohio 7364
Ohio Ct. App.2017Background
- Workman was convicted in Auglaize County of 39 counts of illegal use of a minor in nudity‑oriented material (R.C. 2907.323(A)(1)), 39 counts of illegal use (A)(3), and 1 count of tampering with evidence (R.C. 2921.12(A)(1)).
- The conviction was based on two minor girls identifying Workman and on photographs and text messages linking him to the offenses.
- Workman filed a series of postconviction and Franks-related pleadings, including a December 2016 motion for a new trial and later amended/ successive petitions, which the trial court denied.
- In February 2017 the trial court denied the successive postconviction petition on res judicata grounds, and no evidentiary hearing was held on that petition.
- Workman appeals challenging the denial of the successive petition and the failure to hold an evidentiary hearing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the petition complied with RC 2953.23(A)(1) for a successive postconviction relief petition. | Workman argues the new analyses show a constitutional error would change the outcome. | State contends the new material is not new evidence and does not show unavoidably prevented discovery. | No; the petition failed the A(1) prongs and the court lacked jurisdiction. |
| Whether the trial court abused by not holding an evidentiary hearing on the successive petition. | Workman asserts the full record plus new arguments establish a substantial ground for relief. | State contends no new facts justify an evidentiary hearing under RC 2953.23(A)(1). | No; no substantial grounds shown; court did not err in denying an evidentiary hearing. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Keith, 176 Ohio App.3d 260 (2008-Ohio-741) (postconviction-relief standard; collateral attack)
- State v. Calhoun, 86 Ohio St.3d 279 (1999) (postconviction relief; res judicata/adequacy of review)
- State v. Steffen, 70 Ohio St.3d 399 (1994) (limits on postconviction relief; standard of review)
- State v. Cunningham, 2016-Ohio-3106 (2016-Ohio-3106) (second petitions; unavoidably prevented discovery/constitutional error)
- State v. Chavis, 2015-Ohio-5549 (2015-Ohio-5549) (exceptions for successive petitions under RC 2953.23)
- State v. Gondor, 112 Ohio App.3d 377 (2006-Ohio-6679) (abuse-of-discretion standard; postconviction relief)
- State v. Reynolds, 79 Ohio St.3d 158 (1997) (res judicata and postconviction review)