State v. Lee

Summary

The Ohio Fifth District Court of Appeals affirmed the Tuscarawas County Court of Common Pleas judgment denying Gary A. Lee’s motion for release from postrelease control. The court held that the trial court properly advised Lee at sentencing regarding the mandatory five-year postrelease-control term and the consequences of violating it.

Holdings

1. The trial court properly advised Lee regarding postrelease control by informing him of the five-year supervision period, indicating that postrelease control was mandatory, and explaining the consequences of violating its terms.
2. The trial court's advisement was adequate because the consequences for violating postrelease control, including the potential additional prison term, are discretionary, and the court properly advised Lee accordingly.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court properly notified Lee at the sentencing hearing of the required terms, mandatory nature, and consequences of postrelease control.
2. Whether the trial court's statement that Lee would risk having additional time added to a sentence for committing a new felony improperly characterized the consequence as discretionary.

Disposition

affirmed