State v. Saxon, 109 Ohio St. 3d 176

Summary

The Ohio Supreme Court held that an appellate court may modify or vacate only the sentence for an offense that was appealed, and may not vacate the entire multiple-offense sentence based on an error involving a single unchallenged offense. The court rejected the federal sentencing-package doctrine as incompatible with Ohio’s offense-by-offense sentencing scheme and held that res judicata bars later challenges to sentences not raised on direct appeal.

Holdings

1. An appellate court may modify or vacate only a sentence appealed under R.C. 2953.08 and may not vacate the entire multiple-offense sentence based on an error in the sentence for one offense when the other sentence was not appealed.
2. Ohio does not recognize the federal sentencing-package doctrine; neither sentencing courts nor appellate courts may treat multiple Ohio felony sentences as an interdependent sentencing package.
3. A defendant who fails to challenge a sentence for a particular offense on direct appeal is barred by res judicata from challenging that sentence after remand for resentencing on other offenses.

Questions Presented

1. Whether an appellate court may vacate or modify the sentence for an offense that the defendant did not challenge on appeal when another sentence in a multiple-offense case is erroneous.
2. Whether Ohio recognizes or permits application of the federal sentencing-package doctrine.
3. Whether Ohio's sentencing statutes require appellate review and resentencing of each offense separately rather than treatment of multiple sentences as one sentencing package.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded