acquittal or conviction bar in Ohio

2026State v. Buehner, 2006-Ohio-4707 , ¶ 7, citing Weaver v. Sacks, 173 Ohio St. 415 , 417 (1962). “‘An indictment meets constitutional requirements if it “first, contains the elements of the offense charged and fairly informs a defendant of the charge against which he must defend, and, second, enables him to plead an acquittal or conviction in bar of future prosecutions for the same offense.”’” Buehner at ¶ 9 , quoting State v. Childs, 2000-Ohio-425, ¶ 34 , quoting Hamling v. United States, 418 U.S. 87, 117-118 (1974).

2023(OR 2) {¶49} To meet constitutional requirements, an indictment must (1) contain the elements of the offense charged and fairly inform the defendant of that charge and (2) enable Meigs App. No. 22CA10 20 the defendant “to plead an acquittal or conviction in bar of future prosecutions for the same offense.” State v. Childs, 88 Ohio St.3d 558, 565 , 2000-Ohio-425 , 728 N.E.2d 379 (Childs II).

2017Each count of the indictment or information shall state the numerical designation of the statute that the defendant is alleged to have violated.” {¶22} “An indictment meets constitutional requirements if it ‘first, contains the elements of the offense charged and fairly informs a defendant of the charge against which he must defend, and, second, enables him to plead an acquittal or conviction in bar of future prosecutions for the same offense. * * * “Undoubtedly the language of the statute may be used in the general description of an offence, but it must be accompanied with such a statement of

2017Each count of the indictment or information shall state the numerical designation of the statute that the defendant is alleged to have violated.” {¶22} “An indictment meets constitutional requirements if it ‘first, contains the elements of the offense charged and fairly informs a defendant of the charge against which he must defend, and, second, enables him to plead an acquittal or conviction in bar of future prosecutions for the same offense. * * * “Undoubtedly the language of the statute may be used in the general description of an offence, but it must be accompanied with such a statement of

2020The statement may be in the words of the applicable section of the statute, provided the words of that statute charge an offense, or in words sufficient to give the defendant notice of all the elements of the offense with which the defendant is charged.’ ” {¶56} “ ‘An indictment meets constitutional requirements if it “first, contains the elements of the offense charged and fairly informs a defendant of the charge against which he must defend, and, second, enables him to plead an acquittal or conviction in bar of future prosecutions for the same offense.” ’ ” Jackson at ¶ 13 ; quoting State v.

2020The statement may be in the words of the applicable section of the statute, provided the words of that statute charge an offense, or in words sufficient to give the defendant notice of all the elements of the offense with which the defendant is charged.’ ” {¶56} “ ‘An indictment meets constitutional requirements if it “first, contains the elements of the offense charged and fairly informs a defendant of the charge against which he must defend, and, second, enables him to plead an acquittal or conviction in bar of future prosecutions for the same offense.” ’ ” Jackson at ¶ 13 ; quoting State v.

2020The statement may be in the words of the applicable section of the statute, provided the words of that statute charge an offense, or in words sufficient to give the defendant notice of all the elements of the offense with which the defendant is charged.’ ” {¶56} “ ‘An indictment meets constitutional requirements if it “first, contains the elements of the offense charged and fairly informs a defendant of the charge against which he must defend, and, second, enables him to plead an acquittal or conviction in bar of future prosecutions for the same offense.” ’ ” Jackson at ¶ 13 ; quoting State v.

2020The statement may be in the words of the applicable section of the statute, provided the words of that statute charge an offense, or in words sufficient to give the defendant notice of all the elements of the offense with which the defendant is charged.’ ” {¶56} “ ‘An indictment meets constitutional requirements if it “first, contains the elements of the offense charged and fairly informs a defendant of the charge against which he must defend, and, second, enables him to plead an acquittal or conviction in bar of future prosecutions for the same offense.” ’ ” Jackson at ¶ 13 ; quoting State v.

2011Defendant primarily relies on Russell v. United States (1962), 369 U.S. 749, 763-64 , 82 S.Ct. 1038 , 8 L.Ed.2d 240 ; Valentine v. Konteh (C.A. 6, 2005), 395 F.3d 626 , and State v. Holder, Cuyahoga App. No. 89709, 2008-Ohio-1271 . {¶ 25} Russell requires that an indictment (1) contain the elements of the offense charged, (2) provide the defendant adequate notice of the charges against which he must defend, and (3) provide protection against double jeopardy by enabling the defendant to plead an acquittal or conviction to bar future prosecutions for the same offense.

2010Citing Valentine v. Konteh (C.A.6 2005), 395 F.3d 626 . -4- {¶11} The Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution states in part that “[i]n all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall * * * be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation.” In order for an indictment to be constitutionally sound it must contain “the elements of the offense charged and fairly inform a defendant of the charge against which he must defend, and, second, enable him to plead an acquittal or conviction in bar of future prosecutions for the same offense.” Hamling v. United States (1974), 418 U.S. 87, 117-1

2024Indictment {¶22} Mr. Honeycutt next argues that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to timely object to the date range alleged in the indictment, i.e., that the offenses occurred on or about June 1, 2020, through December 19, 2022. {¶23} Under the federal and Ohio Constitutions, “a person accused of a felony is entitled to an indictment setting forth the ‘nature and cause of the accusation.’” State v. Troisi, 2022-Ohio-3582, ¶ 21 . “‘An indictment meets constitutional requirements if it “first, contains the elements of the offense charged and fairly informs a defendant of the charge agai

2024State v. Troisi, 169 Ohio St.3d 514 , 2022-Ohio-3582 , 206 N.E.3d 695, ¶ 22 . {¶ 24} Petitto argues prejudice in the omission of the statutory penalty language in R.C. 2903.11(D)(1)(a), and the improper inclusion of R.C. 2903.11(B) (felonious assault where an accused engaged in sexual conduct without disclosing the accused’s HIV positive status).

2023Winegarner does not contest that the indictments set forth crimes upon which the trial could proceed and acknowledges that “[a]n indictment returned by a legally constituted and unbiased grand jury, like an information drawn by the prosecutor, if valid on its face, is enough to call for trial of the charge on the merits.” Costello v. United States, 350 U.S. 359, 363 , 76 S.Ct. 406 , 100 L.Ed. 397 (1956).

2023Winegarner does not contest that the indictments set forth crimes upon which the trial could proceed and acknowledges that “[a]n indictment returned by a legally constituted and unbiased grand jury, like an information drawn by the prosecutor, if valid on its face, is enough to call for trial of the charge on the merits.” Costello v. United States, 350 U.S. 359, 363 , 76 S.Ct. 406 , 100 L.Ed. 397 (1956).

2021Thus, the indictment itself was in full compliance with Ohio due process requirements. “‘An indictment meets constitutional requirements if it “first, contains the elements of the offense charged and fairly informs a defendant of the charge against which he must defend, and, second, enables him to plead an acquittal or conviction in bar of future prosecutions for the same offense.”’” Jackson, 134 Ohio St.3d 184 , 2012-Ohio-5561 , 980 N.E.2d 1032, at ¶ 13 , quoting Childs, 88 Ohio St.3d 558, 565 , 728 N.E.2d 379 , and Hamling.

2021Thus, the indictment itself was in full compliance with Ohio due process requirements. “‘An indictment meets constitutional requirements if it “first, contains the elements of the offense charged and fairly informs a defendant of the charge against which he must defend, and, second, enables him to plead an acquittal or conviction in bar of future prosecutions for the same offense.”’” Jackson, 134 Ohio St.3d 184 , 2012-Ohio-5561 , 980 N.E.2d 1032, at ¶ 13 , quoting Childs, 88 Ohio St.3d 558, 565 , 728 N.E.2d 379 , and Hamling.

2020However, “if the indictment does not name the essential elements of the criminal offense charged, the indictment is insufficient to charge the defendant with that offense.” Jackson at ¶ 14 ; citing State v. Jester, 32 Ohio St.3d 147, 149 , 512 N.E.2d 962 (1987).

2020However, “if the indictment does not name the essential elements of the criminal offense charged, the indictment is insufficient to charge the defendant with that offense.” Jackson at ¶ 14 ; citing State v. Jester, 32 Ohio St.3d 147, 149 , 512 N.E.2d 962 (1987).

2018Warren No. CA2012-08-079, 2013-Ohio-1612, ¶ 30 , quoting Jackson at ¶ 13 . {¶ 9} In Jackson, the Ohio Supreme Court held that "for the purpose of identifying the drug involved in a drug-trafficking offense under R.C. 2925.03(A), an indictment is sufficient if it names the schedule in which the drug appears." Id. at paragraph one of the syllabus.

2018Warren No. CA2012-08-079, 2013-Ohio-1612, ¶ 30 , quoting Jackson at ¶ 13 . {¶ 9} In Jackson, the Ohio Supreme Court held that "for the purpose of identifying the drug involved in a drug-trafficking offense under R.C. 2925.03(A), an indictment is sufficient if it names the schedule in which the drug appears." Id. at paragraph one of the syllabus.

2024Wood No. WD-20-084, 2022-Ohio-2070, ¶ 204 , an indictment is constitutionally sufficient if it, “Contains the elements of the offense[s] * * * gives the defendant notice of the charge[s] * * * [and] protects the defendant against double jeopardy by enabling him to plead an acquittal or conviction and bar of future prosecutions for the same offense[s].” {¶ 19} As applied to the instant case, as discussed above, appellant’s position upon appeal is that the indictment in case No. 2021-CR-402 failed to protect him against double jeopardy based upon his prior conviction on an allegedly identical of

2023“An indictment must charge a criminal offense ‘ “with reasonable certainty * * * so as to apprise the defendant of that which he may expect to meet and be required to answer; so that the court and jury may know what they are to try, and the court may determine without unreasonable difficulty what evidence is admissible.” ’ ” State v. Lambert, 2017-Ohio-4310 , 82 N.E.3d 29 , ¶ 11 (4th Dist.), quoting State v. Horner, 126 Ohio St.3d 466 , 2010-Ohio-3830 , 935 N.E.2d 26, ¶ 10 , quoting Horton v. State, 85 Ohio St.13, 19, 9 N.E. 797 (1911). {¶50} Generally, the requirements of an indictment may be

2022Muskingum No. CT2019-0042, 2020-Ohio-1263, ¶ 63-71 . {¶ 204} An indictment is constitutionally sufficient if it contains the elements of the offense, gives the defendant adequate notice of the charge he must defend against, and protects the defendant against double jeopardy by “‘enabl[ing] him to plead an acquittal or conviction in bar of future prosecutions for the same offense.’” United States v. Resendiz-Ponce, 549 U.S. 102, 108 , 127 S.Ct. 782 , 166 L.Ed.2d 591 (2007), quoting Hamling v. United States, 418 U.S. 87, 117 , 94 S.Ct. 2887 , 41 L.Ed.2d 590 (1974); State v. Hayes, 6th Dist.

2022Muskingum No. CT2019-0042, 2020-Ohio-1263, ¶ 63-71 . {¶ 204} An indictment is constitutionally sufficient if it contains the elements of the offense, gives the defendant adequate notice of the charge he must defend against, and protects the defendant against double jeopardy by “‘enabl[ing] him to plead an acquittal or conviction in bar of future prosecutions for the same offense.’” United States v. Resendiz-Ponce, 549 U.S. 102, 108 , 127 S.Ct. 782 , 166 L.Ed.2d 591 (2007), quoting Hamling v. United States, 418 U.S. 87, 117 , 94 S.Ct. 2887 , 41 L.Ed.2d 590 (1974); State v. Hayes, 6th Dist.

2022Lucas No. L-14-1249, 2016-Ohio-330, ¶ 14 .

2022Muskingum No. CT2019-0042, 2020-Ohio-1263, ¶ 63-71 . {¶ 204} An indictment is constitutionally sufficient if it contains the elements of the offense, gives the defendant adequate notice of the charge he must defend against, and protects the defendant against double jeopardy by “‘enabl[ing] him to plead an acquittal or conviction in bar of future prosecutions for the same offense.’” United States v. Resendiz-Ponce, 549 U.S. 102, 108 , 127 S.Ct. 782 , 166 L.Ed.2d 591 (2007), quoting Hamling v. United States, 418 U.S. 87, 117 , 94 S.Ct. 2887 , 41 L.Ed.2d 590 (1974); State v. Hayes, 6th Dist.

2012Since his indictment is not defective, Hatfield’s third possible assigned error is frivolous and overruled. {¶ 16} Hatfield’s fourth possible assigned error is as follows: {¶ 17} “COUNSEL’S FAILURE TO SEEK A RESTITUTION HEARING CONSTITUTE[S] INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL.” {¶ 18} As this Court has previously noted: “We review the alleged instances of ineffective assistance of trial counsel under the two prong analysis set forth in Strickland v. Washington (1984), 466 U.S. 668 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 , and adopted by the Supreme Court of Ohio in State v. Bradley (1989), 42 Ohio St

2012Since his indictment is not defective, Hatfield’s third possible assigned error is frivolous and overruled. {¶ 16} Hatfield’s fourth possible assigned error is as follows: {¶ 17} “COUNSEL’S FAILURE TO SEEK A RESTITUTION HEARING CONSTITUTE[S] INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL.” {¶ 18} As this Court has previously noted: “We review the alleged instances of ineffective assistance of trial counsel under the two prong analysis set forth in Strickland v. Washington (1984), 466 U.S. 668 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 , and adopted by the Supreme Court of Ohio in State v. Bradley (1989), 42 Ohio St

2012Since his indictment is not defective, Hatfield’s third possible assigned error is frivolous and overruled. {¶ 16} Hatfield’s fourth possible assigned error is as follows: {¶ 17} “COUNSEL’S FAILURE TO SEEK A RESTITUTION HEARING CONSTITUTE[S] INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL.” {¶ 18} As this Court has previously noted: “We review the alleged instances of ineffective assistance of trial counsel under the two prong analysis set forth in Strickland v. Washington (1984), 466 U.S. 668 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 , and adopted by the Supreme Court of Ohio in State v. Bradley (1989), 42 Ohio St

2011Defendant primarily relies on Russell v. United States (1962), 369 U.S. 749, 763-64 , 82 S.Ct. 1038 , 8 L.Ed.2d 240 ; Valentine v. Konteh (C.A. 6, 2005), 395 F.3d 626 , and State v. Holder, Cuyahoga App. No. 89709, 2008-Ohio-1271 . {¶ 25} Russell requires that an indictment (1) contain the elements of the offense charged, (2) provide the defendant adequate notice of the charges against which he must defend, and (3) provide protection against double jeopardy by enabling the defendant to plead an acquittal or conviction to bar future prosecutions for the same offense.

2011Defendant primarily relies on Russell v. United States (1962), 369 U.S. 749, 763-64 , 82 S.Ct. 1038 , 8 L.Ed.2d 240 ; Valentine v. Konteh (C.A. 6, 2005), 395 F.3d 626 , and State v. Holder, Cuyahoga App. No. 89709, 2008-Ohio-1271 . {¶ 25} Russell requires that an indictment (1) contain the elements of the offense charged, (2) provide the defendant adequate notice of the charges against which he must defend, and (3) provide protection against double jeopardy by enabling the defendant to plead an acquittal or conviction to bar future prosecutions for the same offense.

2009Lesser included offenses need not be separately charged in an indictment, because when an indictment charges a greater offense, it “ ‘necessarily and simultaneously charges the defendant with lesser included offenses as well.’ ” State v. Smith, 121 Ohio St.3d 409 , 2009-Ohio-787 , 905 N.E .2d 151, ¶ 14, quoting State v. Lytle (1990), 49 Ohio St.3d 154, 157 , 551 N.E.2d 950 .

2009Lesser included offenses need not be separately charged in an indictment, because when an indictment charges a greater offense, it “ ‘necessarily and simultaneously charges the defendant with lesser included offenses as well.’ ” State v. Smith, 121 Ohio St.3d 409 , 2009-Ohio-787 , 905 N.E .2d 151, ¶ 14, quoting State v. Lytle (1990), 49 Ohio St.3d 154, 157 , 551 N.E.2d 950 .

2009Lesser included offenses need not be separately charged in an indictment, because when an indictment charges a greater offense, it “ ‘necessarily and simultaneously charges the defendant with lesser included offenses as well.’ ” State v. Smith, 121 Ohio St.3d 409 , 2009-Ohio-787 , 905 N.E .2d 151, ¶ 14, quoting State v. Lytle (1990), 49 Ohio St.3d 154, 157 , 551 N.E.2d 950 .

2008Goldfuss v. Davidson (1997), 79 Ohio St.3d 116 , 121 , 1997-Ohio-401 . {¶ 36} The Ohio Supreme Court has held that an indictment meets constitutional requirements if it (1) contains the elements of the offense charged and fairly informs a defendant of the charge against which he must defend, and (2) enables him to plead an acquittal or conviction in bar of future prosecutions for the same offense.