State v. Wright

Citations

• 2025 Ohio 1690

Syllabus

Defendant's 24-year indefinite sentence for four counts of use of a minor in nudity-oriented material or performance is affirmed. The trial court expressly considered the purposes of felony sentencing and the relevant sentencing factors and was not required to make any specific findings regarding them; the appellate court has no legal authority to second-guess the trial court's consideration of these factors. Defendant did not demonstrate his sentence was disproportionate to other similar defendants. Defendant also failed to show how his counsel's performance was objectively deficient or how those alleged deficiencies would have changed the outcome for defendant. Finally, the fact defendant's attorney is subject to disciplinary action does not, in and of itself, demonstrate that a defendant experienced ineffective assistance of counsel.