Ursic v. Warden, Bellmont Correctional Institution
2:20-cv-05503
S.D. OhioOct 13, 2021Background
- Petitioner Benjamin Ursic was convicted in Ohio of felonious assault and failure to comply with a police order after an incident involving deputies and body/dash camera footage.
- Ursic filed a federal habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 raising (1) a Double Jeopardy/merger claim (allied-offenses/intent to injure) and (2) a sufficiency-of-the-evidence claim regarding felonious assault.
- The Magistrate Judge denied Ursic’s motion to stay federal proceedings to exhaust additional state claims, concluding Ursic had no viable unexhausted claims and state post-conviction claims were likely barred by res judicata; the Magistrate recommended dismissal of the petition.
- The Seventh District (Ohio) had applied the Ruff allied-offenses test and concluded the encounters were distinct in time/place so separate convictions were proper; it also found sufficient evidence to support felonious assault when evidence is viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution.
- The District Court reviewed Ursic’s objections, applied AEDPA deference to the state-court factual and legal determinations, overruled the objections, adopted the Report and Recommendation, denied the petition, and refused a certificate of appealability (COA) and in forma pauperis for appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Ursic) | Defendant's Argument (State/Respondent) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Motion to stay (Rhines exhaustion) | Stay warranted because state post-conviction timeliness confusion and COVID delays show good cause; claims meritorious; no dilatory tactics | No unexhausted meritorious claims; post-conviction claims were or should have been raised on direct appeal and are likely barred by res judicata; delay unexplained | Denied — no basis for stay; Magistrate order affirmed; appeal denied |
| Double jeopardy / allied-offenses merger | Convictions should merge: offenses arose from one continuous act with a single animus; State failed to prove separate intent to injure each officer | Ohio appellate court applied Ruff and found offenses were distinct in time/place and committed with separate animus; state analysis dispositive and entitled to AEDPA deference | Denied — State court’s Ruff analysis was reasonable; merger/Double Jeopardy claim rejected |
| Sufficiency of evidence for felonious assault | Bodycam/dashcam contradict officer testimony; actions show turning away, not intent to strike; earlier report undermines later testimony | Testimony plus video, when viewed favorably to prosecution, supports finding Ursic acted knowingly to attempt to strike officers; state court credibility findings entitled to deference | Denied — competent evidence supports conviction; petitioner failed to overcome AEDPA/presumption of correctness |
| Certificate of appealability / IFP on appeal | Requests COA | Respondent opposes | COA denied; appeal would be frivolous; IFP on appeal denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Rhines v. Weber, 544 U.S. 269 (stay for mixed habeas petitions requires good cause, meritorious unexhausted claims, and no abuse of the process)
- Pace v. DiGuglielmo, 544 U.S. 408 (burden to show good cause for failure to exhaust in state court)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for sufficiency of the evidence review in criminal cases)
- Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299 (test for whether two offenses constitute the same offense for double jeopardy purposes)
- Wright v. West, 505 U.S. 277 (addressing federal habeas review of sufficiency claims and standards)
- Brown v. Konteh, 567 F.3d 191 (discussing double deference under AEDPA when state courts decide sufficiency and credibility issues)
- State v. Ruff, 143 Ohio St. 3d 114 (Ohio allied-offenses test: dissimilar import, separate conduct, or separate animus permits separate convictions)