Summary
This Ohio Court of Appeals decision addresses an appellant's challenge to his criminal sentence for telecommunications harassment and resisting arrest. The court found that the trial court failed to make the mandatory statutory findings required by R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) before imposing consecutive prison terms. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the judgment and remanded the case solely for the trial court to make the requisite sentencing findings.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the trial court erred by imposing consecutive sentences without making the findings required by R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) at the sentencing hearing.
Holdings
- A trial court imposing consecutive prison terms must make the findings required by R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) at the sentencing hearing and incorporate those findings into the sentencing entry. Because the trial court made findings in the sentencing entry but did not make the required findings at the sentencing hearing, the consecutive sentences could not stand and the matter had to be remanded for the trial court to make the findings.
Key quotations
“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.” (¶ 6)
“This matter must be remanded solely for the limited purpose of allowing the trial court an opportunity to make findings in support of its decision to impose consecutive sentences.” (¶ 8)
Factual background
Weber ingested drugs and placed disturbing telephone calls to women working at offices throughout Summit County. During the calls, he made vulgar comments and engaged in lewd conduct. He was indicted on four telecommunications-harassment counts and one resisting-arrest count, pleaded guilty, and received consecutive sentences on the telecommunications-harassment convictions.
Procedural history
A Summit County grand jury indicted Weber on four telecommunications-harassment counts and one resisting-arrest count. After initially pleading not guilty, Weber pleaded guilty to all charges. The trial court imposed a 90-day concurrent jail term for resisting arrest and consecutive nine-month terms for the four telecommunications-harassment counts, for an aggregate three-year prison sentence. The Ohio Ninth District Court of Appeals reversed and remanded for the limited purpose of allowing the trial court to make the required consecutive-sentence findings.
Remand instructions
Remand solely for the trial court to make the appropriate findings in support of its decision to impose consecutive sentences. Further proceedings must be consistent with the opinion.