State v. Andrew, 2012 Ohio 1731

Police approached Andrew during a drug investigation; he refused to exit the vehicle and fled.
He drove onto I-75, abandoned his car after striking a utility pole, and fled on foot while firing at pursuing officers.
SWAT was deployed, streets were closed, a nearby store evacuated, and Andrew was eventually apprehended.
Grand jury indicted Andrew on five counts, including attempted murder and felonious assault; he was convicted of three counts, acquitted on attempted murder, and the felonious assault count was unresolved.
The trial court sentenced Andrew to maximum five years for failure-to-comply, 12 months for inducing panic, and 18 months for obstructing official business, to be served consecutively for 7.5 years; on appeal, the inducing-panic and obstructing-should-be-reevaluated, with obstructing sentence determined to be outside statutory range.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Did inducing panic violate the manifest weight standard given felonious assault was not convicted?	Andrew (State) argues inconsistency of verdicts warrants reversal.	Andrew contends the jury lost its way since felonious assault was unresolved.	No; the inducing-panic conviction is supported and not inverse.
Was the obstructing official business sentence within statutory range?	State contends sentence falls within statute.	Andrew argues 18 months exceeds the 12-month maximum for a fifth-degree felony.	Vacate the obstructing official business sentence and remand for resentencing on count 4.
May the court correct sentencing error via clerical/nunc pro tunc means?			The court cannot use nunc pro tunc to reflect what it would have decided; remand for proper resentencing on count 4.

State v. Lattimore, 1st Dist. No. C-010488, 2002-Ohio-723 (2002) (inconsistent verdicts on separate counts do not overturn a verdict)
State v. Lovejoy, 79 Ohio St.3d 440, 683 N.E.2d 1112 (1997) (manifest weight standard guidance for inconsistent verdicts)
State v. Trewartha, 165 Ohio App.3d 91, 2005-Ohio-5697, 844 N.E.2d 1218 (2005) (viability of inconsistent verdicts across counts)
State v. Hicks, 43 Ohio St.3d 72, 538 N.E.2d 1030 (1989) (standard for reversals on manifest weight and sufficiency)
State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380, 678 N.E.2d 541 (1997) (jury's responsibility in assessing witness credibility and weight)
State v. DeHass, 10 Ohio St.2d 230, 227 N.E.2d 212 (1967) (basis for sufficiency and weight review)
State v. Kalish, 120 Ohio St.3d 23, 2008-Ohio-4912, 896 N.E.2d 124 (2008) (statutory sentencing range considerations)
State v. Saxon, 109 Ohio St.3d 176, 2006-Ohio-1245, 846 N.E.2d 824 (2006) (remand for resentencing where appropriate)
State ex rel. Cruzado v. Zaleski, 111 Ohio St.3d 353, 2006-Ohio-5795, 856 N.E.2d 263 (2006) (limits on use of nunc pro tunc corrections)
Mayer v. Henson, 97 Ohio St.3d 276, 2002-Ohio-6323, 779 N.E.2d 223 (2002) (precedent on clerical error corrections)
Fogle v. Steiner, 74 Ohio St.3d 158, 656 N.E.2d 1288 (1995) (proper handling of appeals and judgments)
Qualls, Ohio St.3d , 2012-Ohio-1111, N.E.2d (2012) (contemporary Ohio sentencing and judgment correction principles)