Summary
The Supreme Court of Ohio held that R.C. 2953.82(D), which made a prosecutor’s disagreement with an eligible inmate’s request for DNA testing final and nonappealable and barred courts from ordering testing without prosecutorial agreement, violated the separation-of-powers doctrine. The court concluded that the provision improperly restricted judicial authority over matters affecting the determination of guilt. It severed subsection (D), affirmed the appellate court’s judgment, and remanded for further proceedings.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether R.C. 2953.82(D), which makes a prosecutor's disagreement with an eligible inmate's DNA-testing request final and unreviewable and bars a court from ordering testing without prosecutorial agreement, violates the separation-of-powers doctrine.
- Whether the unconstitutional portions of R.C. 2953.82(D) may be severed from the remainder of the statute.
Holdings
- R.C. 2953.82(D) is unconstitutional because its provisions making a prosecutor's disagreement with an inmate's DNA-testing request final and unappealable, and depriving courts of authority to order testing without prosecutorial agreement, improperly interfere with judicial authority.
- R.C. 2953.82(D) is severable from the remainder of R.C. 2953.82.
Key quotations
“the legislature, however, may not impede the judiciary in its province to determine guilt in a criminal matter — and DNA testing results affect that issue — nor can it delegate to the executive branch of government the power to exercise judicial authority.” (261)
“Accordingly, R.C. 2953.82(D) violates the doctrine of separation of powers and is therefore unconstitutional.” (261)
“Striking subsection (D) from R.C. 2953.82, which delegates judicial authority to the executive branch of government, meets the Geiger test” (262)
Factual background
In 1990, Cameron Sterling forcibly raped a child under thirteen. He later entered an Alford plea to an amended rape charge without the force specification and received a six-to-twenty-five-year prison sentence. In 2003, Sterling requested DNA testing, asserting that semen had been recovered during the investigation and that DNA specimens had been collected from him but never compared. The prosecutor opposed the request, and the trial court denied it.
Procedural history
Sterling pleaded guilty under an Alford plea to an amended rape charge and was sentenced by the Ashtabula County Court of Common Pleas. More than twelve years later, he sought DNA testing under R.C. 2953.82; the prosecutor disagreed and the trial court denied the motion. The court of appeals held subsection (D) unconstitutional, and the Supreme Court of Ohio affirmed and remanded for further proceedings.
Remand instructions
The matter was remanded to the Ashtabula County Court of Common Pleas for further proceedings consistent with the opinion. The court may exercise judicial authority to determine the DNA-testing request, subject to appropriate appellate review, after subsection (D) is severed.