State v. Ward

Citations

• 2018 Ohio 2572

Syllabus

Appellant incorrectly argues that he would have been statutorily ineligible for a prison term under R.C. 2929.13(B)(1)(b)(iii) had he not been compelled to answer incriminating questions about his drug use during his presentence investigation interview. Regardless of his admitted drug use, Appellant was eligible to receive a prison term under R.C. 2929.13(B)(1)(b)(iii) because he violated a condition of his bond requiring him to cooperate with the probation department during the presentence investigation. In addition, the incriminating information elicited during the presentence investigation process was not in violation of Appellant's Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination because Appellant failed to invoke the protections afforded by the Fifth Amendment and none of the exceptions for failing to invoke those protections apply. Judgment affirmed.