State v. Andrews
2021 Ohio 3507
Ohio Ct. App.2021Background
- On December 15, 2019, Jeremy Andrews went to the Encore Bar with a loaded gun, fired at a man who fled (missed), discarded the gun when police approached, and was arrested.
- Recorded jail calls and victim statements established Andrews went to confront the man after learning the man had assaulted Andrews’ girlfriend.
- Andrews was indicted for felonious assault and tampering; later, as part of a plea deal, he pled guilty to tampering (Count Two) and to discharging a firearm on/near prohibited premises with a one-year firearm specification (Count Three).
- At sentencing the trial court imposed 12 months (Count Two), 24 months (Count Three), and a mandatory consecutive 1-year firearm specification, and ordered Counts Two and Three to run consecutively for an aggregate 48-month term.
- The trial court relied on Andrews’ 12-year criminal history (including juvenile violent adjudications and a prior failure to comply with community control) and the dangerousness of firing a loaded gun in a public area.
- Andrews appealed solely challenging the support in the record for the trial court’s statutory findings authorizing consecutive sentences under R.C. 2929.14(C)(4).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the record supports the trial court’s R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) findings for consecutive sentences | State: Trial court made required findings; record (criminal history, dangerous conduct, attempt to conceal gun) supports necessity to punish/protect and proportionality | Andrews: Facts on record do not support findings; presumption for concurrent sentences should prevail; argues policy cited in Metz | Court affirmed: record contains evidence supporting the statutory findings; consecutive sentences upheld |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Marcum, 59 N.E.3d 1231 (Ohio 2016) (sets standard for reviewing felony sentences under R.C. 2953.08(G)(2)).
- State v. Bonnell, 16 N.E.3d 659 (Ohio 2014) (trial court must make statutory findings for consecutive sentences and appellate court must be able to discern supporting record).
- State v. Metz, 146 N.E.3d 1190 (Ohio App. 2019) (Eighth Dist. decision relied on by Andrews; not controlling here).
- State v. Gwynne, 141 N.E.3d 169 (Ohio 2019) (appellate review is limited and does not permit wholesale reweighing under R.C. 2929.11/2929.12).
- State v. Jones, 169 N.E.3d 649 (Ohio 2020) (reinforces limits on appellate review of sentencing factors under R.C. 2953.08(G)(2)).