State v. Gamble

Summary

The Ohio First District Court of Appeals affirmed Demetreist Gamble’s conviction for aggravated menacing. The court held that the conviction was not against the manifest weight of the evidence and that an “X” on the sentencing entry’s fine line indicated that no fine was imposed.

Holdings

1. The conviction was not against the manifest weight of the evidence because the trial court did not clearly lose its way in crediting T.W.'s testimony that Gamble threatened to shoot him and that T.W. subjectively believed Gamble would cause him serious physical harm.
2. The sentencing entry did not impose a fine. The "X" on the fine line indicated that the trial court chose not to impose a fine, while the check marks on the costs and remission lines indicated that court costs were assigned and remitted.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Gamble's aggravated-menacing conviction was against the manifest weight of the evidence because the trial court credited T.W.'s testimony.
2. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by allegedly imposing a fine in the sentencing entry without announcing a fine at the sentencing hearing.

Disposition

affirmed