State v. Thomas

Citations

• 2019 Ohio 132

Syllabus

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW/CRIMINAL – WAIVER OF COUNSEL – COMPETENCY – OTHER-ACTS EVIDENCE – WITNESSES – SENTENCING – ALLIED OFFENSES – R.C. 2941.25: The trial court did not err by failing to sua sponte order a competency evaluation before allowing defendant to waive trial counsel, because defendant did not manifest any observable signs of incompetency during his proceedings such that a reasonable judge would experience genuine doubt his competency. Defendant's endorsement of fringe views did not mean that he could not cooperate with his attorney or understand the judicial proceedings against him. The trial court's admission of other-acts evidence during the testimony of a state's witness did not rise to the level of plain error where defendant elicited similar testimony on cross-examination, and the state presented overwhelming evidence of defendant's guilt. The trial court did not deprive defendant of a fair trial or his right to compulsory process when it failed to construe defendant's pro se motions requesting discovery as requests for assistance in subpoenaing the state's nontestifying informant, where the record demonstrated that defendant knew the identity of the informant and how to subpoena witness, and that he had been provided the assistance of a legal advisor. The trial court erred by sentencing defendant to separate, concurrent terms for allied offenses of similar import where the trial court had determined at sentencing that the offenses of possessing marijuana and trafficking in marijuana were allied offenses of similar import, and the state had elected to pursue the trafficking offense.