State v. Hurley

Summary

The Ohio Second District Court of Appeals affirmed Blayden James Daniel Hurley’s convictions and sentence for aggravated vehicular assault and operating a vehicle under the influence. The court held that the offenses were not allied offenses of similar import and therefore did not merge for sentencing. It also concluded that the record did not support vacating or modifying Hurley’s five-to-seven-and-a-half-year prison sentence.

Holdings

1. OVI and aggravated vehicular assault are of dissimilar import and significance and therefore do not merge; separate convictions and sentences for the offenses are permissible.
2. The five-to-seven-and-a-half-year sentence was not subject to modification or vacatur because Hurley did not clearly and convincingly show that the sentence was unsupported under a reviewable statute or contrary to law.

Questions Presented

1. Whether operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol and aggravated vehicular assault are allied offenses of similar import that must merge for sentencing under Ohio's multiple-offense statute and double-jeopardy protections.
2. Whether the record supported or otherwise permitted the trial court's imposition of an indefinite five-to-seven-and-a-half-year prison sentence for aggravated vehicular assault under R.C. 2953.08(G)(2).

Disposition

affirmed