State v. Burk

2021-Ohio-431 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021) · Court of Appeals of Ohio, Third Appellate District · February 16, 2021 · No. 8-20-31; 8-20-32

Summary

The Ohio Third District Court of Appeals affirmed the Logan County Common Pleas Court’s revocation of Stephanie Burk’s community control and imposition of an aggregate 36-month prison sentence. The court held that the individual sentences were within the statutory range and supported by the sentencing record, and that the trial court made the findings required to impose consecutive sentences.

Court
Court of Appeals of Ohio, Third Appellate District
Writing for the Court
Shaw, J.; Willamowski, P.J.; Zimmerman, J.
Jurisdiction
Ohio
Decision date
February 16, 2021
Docket number
8-20-31; 8-20-32
Procedural posture
Defendant appealed judgments revoking community control in two felony cases and imposing an aggregate 36-month prison term through consecutive 12-month sentences.
Standard of review
Under R.C. 2953.08(G)(2), the appellate court will reverse a sentence only if clear and convincing evidence shows that the record does not support the trial court's statutory findings or that the sentence is otherwise contrary to law.
Precedential value
Published Ohio Court of Appeals opinion
Parties
Stephanie L. Irwin, n.k.a. Stephanie L. Burk v. State of Ohio
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

sentencingcriminal procedureappellate procedurestandard of review

Practice areas

criminal lawsentencingappellate practice

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the aggregate maximum 12-month prison terms imposed after revocation of community control were clearly and convincingly contrary to law.
  2. Whether the trial court properly imposed the reserved prison terms consecutively under R.C. 2929.14(C)(4).

Holdings

  1. The sentences were not contrary to law because each 12-month term was within the statutory range for a fifth-degree felony, the sentences were therefore presumptively valid, and the trial court stated that it considered the felony-sentencing purposes and factors under R.C. 2929.11 and R.C. 2929.12.
  2. The consecutive sentences were lawful because the trial court made the findings required by R.C. 2929.14(C)(4), including that consecutive sentences were necessary to protect the public or punish Burk, were not disproportionate, and that her criminal history supported consecutive sentences.

Key quotations

Thus the reserved prison terms were within the appropriate statutory range, which means the sentences are presumptively valid. (¶14)
In State v. Bonnell, 140 Ohio St.3d 209, 2014-Ohio-3177, ¶ 37, the Supreme Court of Ohio held that a trial court must make the requisite statutory findings before imposing consecutive sentences “at the sentencing hearing and incorporate its findings into its sentencing entry, but it has no obligation to state reasons to support its findings.” (¶19)

Factual background

Burk pleaded guilty to a fifth-degree felony possession-of-heroin charge and, in a separate case, to two fifth-degree felony cocaine-trafficking charges. The trial court placed her on community control and reserved 12-month prison terms for each conviction if she violated community control and it was revoked. After repeated drug-related violations, including positive tests for heroin, cocaine, suboxone, THC, fentanyl, and cocaine and two overdose incidents requiring Narcan, the court revoked community control and imposed three consecutive 12-month terms.

Procedural history

Burk pleaded guilty to possession of heroin in one case and to two cocaine-trafficking offenses in another. She was placed on community control in both cases, with 12-month prison terms reserved if community control was revoked. After repeated violations, including positive tests for multiple controlled substances and two overdose incidents, the Logan County Common Pleas Court revoked community control and imposed the reserved terms consecutively. The Court of Appeals affirmed.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…