State v. Bonness
2013 Ohio 2699
Ohio Ct. App.2013Background
- Bonness, a 53-year-old former police officer with no prior criminal record, was convicted on multiple counts related to child pornography and related offenses.
- On remand from State v. Bonness, 8th Dist. No. 96557, 2012-Ohio-474 (Bonness I), the trial court resentenced him following HB 86’s changes to R.C. 2929.14.
- The resentencing imposed 20 years for eight child-pornography counts (consecutive five-year terms due to four separate download days) and 12.5 additional years for other counts, totaling 32.5 years.
- On appeal, Bonness argued the court failed to consider statutory sentencing factors, used a “sentencing package” approach, and imposed an excessive total relative to similar offenders.
- The appellate court reversed the prior multi-count consecutive sentences in Bonness I and ordered resentencing, prompting the October 2, 2012 resentencing hearing.
- The Eighth District ultimately affirmed the 20-year sentence for the child-pornography counts and upheld the overall sentence as lawful.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court properly considered statutory factors for consecutive sentences | Bonness argues the court failed to consider R.C. 2929.11, 2929.12. | Bonness contends the court neglected statutory factors and used an improper package. | Assignment overruled; findings and consideration were adequate. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Geddes, 8th Dist. No. 91042 (2008 Ohio) (affirmed lengthy sentence; reversed for remand due to disproportionality)
- State v. Carney, 8th Dist. No. 95343 (2011 Ohio) (upheld long sentence for multiple counts of pandering sexually-oriented material)
- State v. Phillips, 8th Dist. No. 92560 (2009 Ohio) (affirmed long sentence in pandering case)
- State v. Saxon, 109 Ohio St.3d 176 (2006 Ohio) (discussed sentencing package doctrine limits)
- State v. Goins, 8th Dist. No. 98256 (2013 Ohio) (sets out Goins three-step consecutive-sentence analysis under 2929.14(C)(4))
- State v. Siber, 8th Dist. No. 94882 (2011 Ohio) (cites consistency considerations in sentencing)
- State v. Mahan, 8th Dist. No. 95696 (2011 Ohio) (illustrates application of consistency standard)
- State v. Moon, 8th Dist. No. 93673 (2010 Ohio) (examples of multiple-count sentencing)
- State v. Weitbrecht, 86 Ohio St.3d 368 (1999 Ohio) (reiterates proportionality standard)