State v. Conacher

Summary

The Ohio Court of Appeals, Eleventh Appellate District, affirmed Elizabeth R. Conacher’s sentence following her guilty plea to aggravated trafficking in drugs. The court held that the sentencing court permissibly considered undisputed uncharged conduct and that Conacher failed to establish ineffective assistance of counsel based on the alleged consideration of her failure to identify the drug source.

Holdings

1. A sentencing court may consider a defendant's uncharged, undisputed conduct when imposing a felony sentence, so long as that conduct is not the sole basis for the sentence. Because the overdose death was not the sole basis for Conacher's sentence and the record supported consideration of other relevant conduct and recidivism factors, the sentence was not contrary to law and did not violate due process.
2. Conacher did not establish ineffective assistance of counsel because the record did not show that she invoked the Fifth Amendment privilege, that the trial court compelled her to identify the drug source, or that counsel performed deficiently by failing to object. She also failed to show a reasonable probability that an objection would have resulted in a lesser sentence.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court imposed a sentence contrary to law or violated due process by considering uncharged conduct, including an overdose death allegedly connected to Conacher's drug trafficking.
2. Whether Conacher received ineffective assistance of counsel when trial counsel failed to object to the trial court's reference to her alleged refusal to identify the source of the drugs, allegedly penalizing her exercise of the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.

Disposition

affirmed