In re P.C., 2019 Ohio 2603

In Oct. 2017, P.C., a 17-year-old, was accused of multiple sexual offenses against his 4-year-old niece; State sought a serious youthful offender (SYO) disposition after juvenile court denied transfer to adult general division.
P.C. pled guilty to an indictment charging rape and gross sexual imposition with SYO specifications; court imposed a blended sentence: juvenile DYS commitment (concurrent minimum terms) with an adult prison term (stayed pending successful completion of the juvenile portion).
At disposition the juvenile court (1) classified P.C. as a Tier III juvenile offender registrant and (2) additionally labeled him an adult Tier III sex offender, and entered those classifications in its judgment entry.
P.C. appealed, arguing the juvenile court lacked statutory authority to (a) classify him under R.C. 2152.82 (which requires a prior sexual adjudication) and (b) to impose an adult Tier III classification under Chapter 2950.
The Ninth District reviewed the statutory framework (R.C. 2152.82–.83), the fact P.C. had no prior sexual adjudication, and that he was committed to a secure facility, and found the court lacked authority to classify him at disposition.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the juvenile court could classify P.C. as a juvenile offender registrant at disposition under R.C. 2152.82/.83	P.C.: classification under R.C.2152.82 was improper because he had no prior sexually oriented adjudication; under R.C.2152.83 classification can occur only at release from a secure facility	State: court intended to classify under R.C.2152.83 and any reference to 2152.82 was a verbal/clerical slip; classification at disposition was valid	Court: sustained error — P.C. could not be classified under 2152.82 (no prior adjudication) and, because he was committed to a secure facility, classification under 2152.83 must occur at release, not at disposition; juvenile Tier III classification vacated and remanded
Whether the court could also classify P.C. as an adult Tier III sex offender under Chapter 2950 at disposition	P.C.: adult Tier III classification was improper because Chapter 2950 governs adults and juvenile classification must follow R.C.2152.83 at release	State: cited cases where word choice was harmless where adult classification followed after failure to complete juvenile portion (distinguishing facts)	Court: sustained error — adult Tier III classification was improper and not harmless here because juvenile classification itself was not properly imposed; adult classification vacated and remanded

State v. Morgan, 153 Ohio St.3d 196 (2017) (plain-error standard in juvenile delinquency proceedings follows criminal plain-error framework)
In re D.J.S., 130 Ohio St.3d 253 (2011) (procedural issues in juvenile adjudications may affect appellate review)
State ex rel. Jean-Baptiste v. Kirsch, 134 Ohio St.3d 421 (2012) (R.C.2152.83 requires classification at time of release from secure facility)
State v. Fischer, 128 Ohio St.3d 92 (2010) (definition and effect of void judgments)
Fairchild v. Lake Shore Elec. Ry. Co., 101 Ohio St. 261 (1920) (courts may disregard mere verbal slips when context shows correct instructions)