State v. Wright

2020 Ohio 5195 (Ohio Ct. App. 2020) · Ohio Court of Appeals, Fourth Appellate District, Highland County · October 26, 2020 · No. 20CA0005

Summary

The Fourth District Court of Appeals of Ohio affirmed Benjamin J. Wright’s conviction and 36-month prison sentence for third-degree-felony sexual battery. The court held that the trial court properly considered the relationship between Wright and the victim as facilitating the offense and properly considered statutory felony-sentencing factors under Ohio Revised Code sections 2929.11 and 2929.12. The court also concluded that the sentence was not clearly and convincingly contrary to law or unsupported by the record.

Court
Ohio Court of Appeals, Fourth Appellate District, Highland County
Writing for the Court
Peter B. Abele; Smith, P.J.; Hess, J.
Jurisdiction
Ohio
Decision date
October 26, 2020
Docket number
20CA0005
Procedural posture
Appeal from a judgment of conviction and sentence entered by the Highland County Court of Common Pleas after appellant pleaded guilty to one count of third-degree-felony sexual battery.
Standard of review
Under R.C. 2953.08(G)(2), an appellate court may increase, reduce, modify, or vacate and remand a felony sentence if it clearly and convincingly finds that the record does not support specified statutory findings or that the sentence is otherwise contrary to law. The review is not for abuse of discretion. A sentence within the statutory range is not contrary to law if the trial court considered the purposes and principles of felony sentencing under R.C. 2929.11, the seriousness and recidivism factors under R.C. 2929.12, and properly imposed post-release control.
Precedential value
Published Ohio Court of Appeals decision; precedential within the applicable Ohio appellate district subject to later treatment.
Parties
Benjamin J. Wright v. State of Ohio
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

sentencingsentencing guidelinesappellate procedurestandard of reviewcriminal procedure

Practice areas

criminal sentencingfelony sentencingcriminal appellate practice

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the trial court improperly used an element of sexual battery—Wright's foster-parent relationship with the victim—to find under R.C. 2929.12(B)(6) that the offense was more serious than conduct normally constituting the offense.
  2. Whether the record supported the trial court's R.C. 2929.12(B)(8) finding that Wright was motivated by prejudice based on the victim's sexual orientation.
  3. Whether Wright's thirty-six-month prison sentence was clearly and convincingly unsupported by the record or otherwise contrary to law.

Holdings

  1. The trial court did not improperly rely on an element of the offense. Although Wright's foster-parent status was an element of sexual battery under R.C. 2907.03(A)(5), the court relied on additional evidence that Wright specifically sought out the vulnerable victim and used his foster-parent role as a tool to facilitate the offense. The record therefore supported the R.C. 2929.12(B)(6) finding.
  2. The record supported the trial court's R.C. 2929.12(B)(8) finding because the evidence showed that Wright selected the victim based on the victim's sexual orientation.
  3. The sentence was not clearly and convincingly contrary to law or unsupported by the record. The thirty-six-month term was within the twelve-to-sixty-month statutory range, the sentencing entry stated that the court considered R.C. 2929.11 and R.C. 2929.12, and the court explained the basis for imposing imprisonment.

Key quotations

The appellate court’s standard of review is not whether the sentencing court abused its discretion. (¶ 5)
A trial court “may not elevate the seriousness of an offense by pointing to a fact that is also an element of the offense itself.” (¶ 10)
These facts indicate appellant’s premeditation to use his foster parent role as a tool to facilitate the offense. (¶ 15)

Factual background

Wright, a foster parent, sought placement of a foster child in his home after learning of the child's sexual orientation and repeatedly contacting the caseworker. The child was placed in Wright's home, and sexual assaults began within approximately one month. Wright pleaded guilty to sexual battery, and the sentencing record indicated that the conduct occurred on at least four occasions.

Procedural history

A Highland County grand jury indicted Wright for sexual battery under R.C. 2907.03(A)(5). Wright pleaded guilty, and the trial court imposed a thirty-six-month prison term, five years of post-release control, and Tier III sex-offender registration. The Ohio Fourth District Court of Appeals reviewed the felony sentence and affirmed.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…