State v. Brandeberry, Court of Appeals No. L-16-1137
| Court | United States Court of Appeals (Ohio) |
| Citation | 2017 Ohio 5676 |
| Docket Number | Court of Appeals No. L-16-1137 |
| Parties | State of Ohio Appellee v. Kassi Brandeberry Appellant |
| Decision Date | 30 June 2017 |
2017 Ohio 5676
State of Ohio Appellee
v.
Kassi Brandeberry Appellant
Court of Appeals No. L-16-1137
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT LUCAS COUNTY
June 30, 2017
Trial Court No. CR0201502044
DECISION AND JUDGMENT
Julia R. Bates, Lucas County Prosecuting Attorney, and Evy M. Jarrett, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.
Timothy Young, Ohio Public Defender, and Charlyn Bohland, Assistant State Public Defender, for appellant.
SINGER, J.
{¶ 1} Appellant, Kassi Brandeberry, appeals the May 25, 2016 judgment of the Lucas County Court of Common Pleas. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.
{¶ 2} Appellant sets forth four assignments of error:
Page 2
Assignment of Error I: The juvenile court erred when it transferred Kassi Brandeberry's case to criminal court because the mandatory transfer provisions in R.C. 2152.10(A)(1)(a) and 2152.12(A)(1)(a) violate a child's right to due process as guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Article I, Section 16, Ohio Constitution. (6/15/2015 Judgment Entry, p.1).
Assignment of Error II: The juvenile court erred when it transferred Kassi Brandeberry's case to criminal court because the mandatory transfer provisions in R.C. 2152.10(A)(1)(a) and 2152.12(A)(1)(a) violate a child's right to equal protection as guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Article I, Section 2, Ohio Constitution. (6/15/2015 Judgment Entry, p.1).
Assignment of Error III: The mandatory sentencing statutes in R.C. 2929 are unconstitutional as applied to children because they do not permit the trial court to make an individualized determination about a child's sentence or the attributes of youth, in violation of Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution; and Article I, Sections 9 and 16, Ohio Constitution. (A-1; 5/25/2016 Judgment Entry, pp.2-3).
Assignment of Error IV: Kassi Brandeberry was denied the effective assistance of counsel, in violation of the Sixth and Fourteenth
Page 3
Amendments to the U.S. Constitution; and Article, [sic] I, Section 10, Ohio Constitution. (6/11/2015 T.pp.35-36; 5/10/2016 T.pp.5-22).
{¶ 3} In the early morning hours of May 2, 2015, appellant set a fire, using gasoline, at the house located at 253 Willard, Toledo, Lucas County, Ohio. As a result of the fire, a 14-year-old young man died and a 13-year-old young man was severely injured. A firefighter was also hurt while fighting the blaze. In addition, the family pets were killed in the fire and the family lost their house and most of the contents of the house.
{¶ 4} Appellant, who was 17 years old at the time of the fire, admitted to setting the fire at the house.
{¶ 5} On May 28, 2015, two complaints were filed in Lucas County Juvenile Court charging appellant with aggravated murder and burglary. The burglary charge stems from an incident which occurred in September 2014, when appellant was 16 years old, and which was unrelated to the May 2, 2015 fire.
{¶ 6} The state moved the juvenile court to transfer appellant to the general division of the Lucas County Court of Common Pleas for prosecution as an adult. A hearing was held, after which the juvenile court found probable cause that appellant had committed the offenses charged. Appellant's case was transferred to the general division of the common pleas court.
Page 4
{¶ 7} On June 30, 2015, the grand jury indicted appellant on the following charges: Count 1, aggravated murder; Count 2, murder; Counts 3, 5, 6, 7 aggravated arson; Count 4, attempt to commit aggravated murder; and Count 8, burglary.
{¶ 8} In April 2016, appellant pled guilty to Counts 2, 5 and 6 of the indictment, as well as to an amended Count 8, attempted burglary. In May 2016, the trial court sentenced appellant to a total prison term of 21 years to life, which included consecutive sentences. The trial court also found appellant was an arson offender, pursuant to R.C. 2909.01. The remaining counts of the indictment were dismissed. Appellant timely appealed.
{¶ 9} Appellant asserts that although her trial counsel failed to raise a constitutional challenge to the mandatory transfer statutes, this court can review her claims under the plain error standard to find her constitutional rights were violated. Appellant argues R.C. 2152.10(A)(1)(a) and 2152.12(A)(1)(a) create an improper, irrebutable presumption that she is as culpable as an adult for the acts she committed and not amenable to treatment in the juvenile system. Appellant contends because of this irrebutable presumption, the juvenile court is prohibited from making an individualized determination of whether she is amenable to rehabilitation in the juvenile system. Appellant submits due process requires an amenability hearing before transferring a child to criminal court.
Page 5
{¶ 10} Appellant notes the Supreme Court of Ohio recently ruled, in December 2016, in State v. Aalim, Slip Opinion No. 2016-Ohio-8278 ("Aalim I"), that the mandatory transfer provisions in R.C. 2152.10(A) and 2152.12(A) were unconstitutional as they violate a child's right to due process.
{¶ 11} The state counters regardless of the Aalim I ruling, the issue here is whether a guilty plea forfeits a claim that Ohio's mandatory transfer provisions are unconstitutional. The state maintains a guilty plea bars all appealable errors except for claims that the plea was not entered voluntarily and knowingly. Even assuming arguendo appellant's claim survives a guilty plea, the state submits she cannot demonstrate the trial court committed plain error in applying the mandatory bindover statutes when those statutes have not been declared unconstitutional by appellate courts despite numerous challenges.
{¶ 12} In Aalim I, a complaint was...
To continue reading
Request your trial