State v. Wood

Citations

• 2020 Ohio 422

Syllabus

Appellant's sentence was not contrary to law where the trial court sentenced appellant within the statutory range and considered the statutory requirements before imposing sentence. The trial court's findings were supported by the record where appellant shot two people and the victims suffered physical injury, and appellant had a long criminal history and was associated with violence while incarcerated. The trial court did not commit plain error by not continuing the trial or ordering a mistrial where a witness testified about a report that the defense was not given during discovery where the report did not prejudice appellant given that other evidence was presented specific to whether the victim fired his gun and because evidence related to the report would not have changed the outcome of the trial. Appellant was not denied effective assistance of counsel where there was no indication that the jury would have found appellant not guilty if defense counsel had used a different trial strategy, cross-examined the witnesses in any different way, or if appellant would have testified at trial. Nor would appellant's sentence have been different had defense counsel requested a presentence investigation or moved for more time before sentencing to find mitigation evidence.