Summary
The Fifth District Court of Appeals of Ohio reviewed John Pettorini's challenges to prison sentences and consecutive sentences imposed after his guilty pleas to drug possession, failure to comply with a police order or signal, and possession of drug abuse instruments. The court held that the trial court properly imposed prison terms and made the findings required for consecutive sentences. The judgment of the Licking County Court of Common Pleas was affirmed.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the trial court erred by imposing prison rather than community control.
- Whether the trial court unlawfully imposed consecutive sentences without adequate statutory support.
Holdings
- The sentence of imprisonment was not contrary to law and was supported by the record. The appellate court therefore would not disturb the trial court's decision to reject community control.
- The trial court properly imposed consecutive prison terms because it made the findings required by R.C. 2929.14(C)(4), incorporated those findings into the sentencing entries, and the record supported them.
Key quotations
“This Court is, therefore, without authority to disturb appellant’s sentence absent a finding by clear and convincing evidence that the record does not support the trial court's findings under R.C. 2929.11 and R.C. 2929.12. Instead we may only determine if the sentence is contrary to law.” (¶ 15)
““In order to impose consecutive terms of imprisonment, a trial court is required to make the findings mandated by R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) at the sentencing hearing and incorporate its findings into its sentencing entry, but it has no obligation to state reasons to support its findings.”” (¶ 25)
Factual background
Pettorini drove left of center and collided with another vehicle while under the influence of drugs; police found fentanyl on his lap and near his vehicle. While under supervision and facing the first charge, he fled from police during a marked-lanes-violation stop, leading officers on a high-speed pursuit and eventually fleeing on foot. He had an extensive history of drug use and prior burglary, drug, and drug-paraphernalia convictions. The trial court relied on these circumstances, his supervision status, and the statutory sentencing factors in imposing prison and consecutive sentences.
Procedural history
Pettorini was indicted in two Licking County criminal cases involving fentanyl possession, failure to comply with a police order or signal, and possession of drug-abuse instruments. He pleaded guilty to the remaining charges after the failure-to-appear charge was dismissed. The trial court imposed an aggregate four-year prison term, consisting of three years in one case and one year in the other, and ordered the terms served consecutively. The Ohio Fifth District Court of Appeals affirmed.