Murder victim Reagan Tokes' family celebrates Ohio Supreme Court decision upholding law

The Ohio Supreme Court has upheld the Reagan Tokes Act — a state law named for an Ohio State University student who was brutally murdered — as constitutional.

The law allows the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction to hold some people in prison longer for bad behavior without the involvement of the sentencing judge.

Ohio’s highest court announced its 5-2 decision Wednesday morning, affirming the decision by two appellate courts that the law does not violate the constitutional rights of inmates or violate the role of the judiciary.

The Reagan Tokes Act, or Ohio Senate Bill 201, took effect in 2019. Under the law, Ohio judges must give indefinite prison sentences for most first- and second-degree felonies by selecting a minimum sentence length at which it’s presumed the defendant will be released. The maximum time the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction may keep the inmate if they misbehave behind bars is determined with a formula: 150% of the minimum term.

Proponents like the Tokes family say the law is intended to keep dangerous criminals who have not been reformed from being released.

Opponents of the law, including some judges and criminal defense lawyers, previously said SB 201 gives judicial power to the executive branch and violates people’s rights — including their rights to due process and a trial.

Who was Reagn Tokes?

Tokes was a 21-year-old Ohio State University student who was abducted after she left her job in the Short North, raped and murdered in 2017 by a man released from prison a few months prior.

After she was raped and ordered to get out of her car naked, her killer, Brian Golsby, shot her in the back near the entrance to Scioto Grove Metro Park in Grove City. A memorial has been erected to her near the park entrance.

Prior to the killing, Golsby spent about six years in prison for robbery and attempted rape, and during that time received numerous infractions.

Golsby was ordered to wear an ankle monitor with GPS tracking upon his release. But in Ohio, nobody monitors parolees’ GPS trackers in real time.

Tokes family reacts to decision

Tokes’ parents, Lisa McCrary-Tokes and Toby Tokes, advocated for SB 201.

"I’m thrilled that the court did the right thing and upheld it, and nothing is going to change with it," McCrary-Tokes told The Dispatch on Wednesday. "It comes down to rules and consequences. If you’re being told something up front and you choose to defy it, there’s a consequence."

The law also allows an individual an opportunity to reduce their time in prison by up to 15% by demonstrating they're reformed, McCrary-Tokes pointed out.

SB 201 was only half of the legislation the Tokes family had pushed for. The second part would establish the monitoring of GPS trackers in real-time, and has been introduced multiple times in the Ohio General Assembly. Last session, a bill passed the House but languished in the Senate.

"It's very frustrating, but we haven't given up on that part," McCrary-Tokes said. "Innocent people are still at risk the way the ankle monitor program currently is. The current system is a waste of taxpayer money and provides a false sense of security."

McCrary-Tokes said if Golsby's GPS tracker had been monitored, her daughter would be alive today.

What does this mean for Franklin County cases?

Two Franklin County Common Pleas Court judges — Carl Aveni and Christopher Brown — are among a handful of judges statewide who ruled that the law was unconstitutional and stopped giving out indefinite sentences.

Both local judges, who started ruling the law was unconstitutional in 2021, told The Dispatch on Wednesday that they plan to abide by the decision of the state's highest court.

Aveni said judges in lower trial courts like his are “duty-bound to follow the precedent.”

On Wednesday morning, Brown sentenced someone for felonious assault and gave out his first Reagan Tokes sentence in more than a year.

“I respect the decision and I intend to follow it,” Brown told The Dispatch.

Brown said he’s not sure how resentencing will work logistically for defendants who were eligible for an indefinite sentence but to whom he did not give one.

He estimates that involves a total of about 20 defendants in his courtroom, and Aveni estimates that is about 40 defendants in his courtroom.

All those people will stay in prison, Aveni assured. It may be as simple as modifying each sentence by judicial order, he said.

The Ohio Supreme Court's decision

The Ohio Supreme Court made this ruling in regard to two cases it consolidated: State of Ohio v. Christopher P. Hacker out of Logan County and State of Ohio v. Danan Simmons Jr. out of Cuyahoga County.

Hacker and Simmons both were convicted of crimes subject to indefinite sentences under SB 201 and challenged the law as unconstitutional.

Writing for the majority, Ohio Supreme Court Justice Joseph T. Deters said the men raised only hypothetical situations where SB 201 might be applied unfairly — like holding somebody for a minor rule infraction.

Deters left the door open should an inmate in the future raise a claim that the ODRC applied the law unconstitutionally.

Chief Justice Sharon L. Kennedy and Justices Patrick F. Fischer, R. Patrick DeWine and Melody Stewart joined Deters’ opinion. All are Republicans except Stewart, who is a Democrat.

Justices Jennifer Brunner and Michael P. Donnelly, both Democrats, dissented. Writing for them both, Brunner said the law does not give inmates appropriate means to challenge the prison authority’s accusations they misbehaved. She said ODRC acts as both prosecutor and judge in these situations, and the judicial system is not involved.

jlaird@dispatch.com

@LairdWrites

This article originally appeared on The Columbus Dispatch: Ohio Supreme Court upholds Reagan Tokes Act on prison sentencing