Youngstown Daily Legal News

Man who pleaded guilty to stabbing victim over drugs loses appeal

ANNIE YAMSON
Special to the Legal News
Published: December 11, 2015

In the 12th District Court of Appeals, a panel of three judges recently affirmed the kidnapping and attempted murder convictions of Samuel Kennel, who pleaded guilty to the charges and then challenged the fairness of the court proceedings against him.

Kennell was indicted on Feb. 6, 2013 in the Clermont County Court of Common Pleas on one count of attempted murder, two counts of felonious assault and one count of kidnapping.

In exchange for the dismissal of the assault counts, Kennell pleaded guilty to the remaining two charges on Sept. 11, 2013.

According to a procedural summary of the case, Kennell stipulated to a bill of particulars which established that he purposefully attempted to cause the death of an unnamed male victim when Kennell sat down next to him, removed a knife and then slit the victim’s throat “with the intention of killing him.”

After that, Kennell “restrained the liberty” of another victim, a female, by holding her at bay with a knife to her throat and threatening to kill her.

The trial court conducted two sentencing hearings, the first of which took place on Oct. 23, 2013 and was continued until a second and final hearing on Nov. 7, 2013.

It ultimately sentenced Kennell to 10 years in prison, three years shy of the maximum possible 13-year sentence he could have received on the charges.

In a delayed appeal filed in January of this year, Kennell assigned three errors to his trial court, the first of which alleged that the trial court erred by failing to ask whether he had reviewed the presentence investigation report and by failing to make findings regarding factual inaccuracies contained in the report.

“We disagree,” Judge Robert Ringland wrote in the opinion he authored on behalf of the appellate panel. “At a hearing on Oct. 23, 2013, appellant’s attorney stated he reviewed the presentence investigation report and discussed statements appellant made to the writer of the report with appellant.”

On the record, Kennell’s lawyer also stated that his client “accepts full responsibility for his transgressions and he doesn’t want to disturb the plea based on comments he made to the PSI writer.”

Kennell then told the trial court that his attorney’s statements were accurate.

“As evidenced in the record, appellant and his counsel reviewed the presentence investigation report before the first sentencing hearing on Oct. 23, 2013 and also had time to review the report before the second hearing on Nov. 7, 2013,” Ringland wrote. “Additionally, the court questioned appellant and his counsel regarding the report at these hearings.”

In its review of the record, the court of appeals found that the trial court, at one point, stated that Kennell committed his crimes “over a woman.”

Kennell took the opportunity to interrupt and corrected the court, stating, “It was over drugs, not a female.”

The trial court replied, “Okay, over drugs then.”

Kennell contended that the exchange indicated that the trial court relied on false information in determining the motivation for his crimes.

“The court conceded that the motivation may have been drugs, and thus implicitly made a finding regarding the alleged factual inaccuracy,” Ringland wrote. “In any event, because appellant failed to show that the court specifically relied on this supposed erroneous information, any failure by the court to make such a finding was immaterial and amounts to harmless error.”

In his second assignment of error, Kennell argued that the trial court failed to hold a hearing to determine whether his attempted murder and kidnapping offenses were allied offenses that should have merged for sentencing.

The appellate panel quickly disposed of that argument.

In his final assignment of error, Kennell set forth 14 alleged errors committed by his attorney and argued that the cumulative error rendered his counsel’s performance deficient.

The court of appeals found no such prejudice. It held that his attorney properly informed him of the effects of his plea and did not coerce him in any way.

“None of appellant’s arguments are supported by the record,” Ringland wrote.

Presiding Judge Stephen Powell and Judge Robert Hendrickson joined Ringland to form the majority affirming the judgment of the Clermont County court.

The case is cited State v. Kennell, 2015-Ohio-4817.

[Back]