State v. Brooks
2017 Ohio 5620
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Victor C. Brooks was indicted (2013) on multiple drug-possession and cocaine-trafficking counts; one count was later dismissed and replaced during trial.
- Jury convicted Brooks of counts 1, 2, 4, 5, and 6; acquitted on the renumbered count 3.
- Trial court sentenced Brooks to an aggregate 49-month prison term, a $5,000 fine, and a 5-year driver’s license suspension.
- Brooks filed a delayed appeal pro se; appellate record lacked the trial transcript and no presentence investigation report was completed.
- Appellant raised three assignments of error: (1) failure to merge allied offenses; (2) failure to make required consecutive-sentence findings under R.C. 2929.14(C)(4); (3) prosecutorial/judicial misconduct, vindictive sentencing, and illegal license suspension.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Brooks) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether convictions for multiple counts should have been merged as allied offenses | State: convictions stand; merger not timely raised below | Brooks: counts 1, 4, 5, 6 are allied and should merge for sentencing | Affirmed — appeal record incomplete (no trial transcript); plain-error review fails because Brooks did not carry burden to show allied-offense plain error |
| Whether trial court made the statutory findings to impose consecutive sentences under R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) | State: consecutive sentences lawful | Brooks: court failed to make all required findings at hearing and relied on non-existent PSI | Reversed in part — sentencing vacated and remanded for resentencing because the court did not make all required R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) findings at the hearing |
| Whether prosecutorial or judicial misconduct deprived Brooks of a fair trial or resulted in vindictive sentencing | State: no reversible misconduct shown | Brooks: misconduct in prosecution of renumbered count and vindictive punishment for going to trial | Overruled — acquittal on the contested count precludes prejudice from alleged prosecutorial misconduct; record does not show vindictiveness and is incomplete, so presumption of regularity applies |
| Whether the 5-year driver’s license suspension was contrary to law | State: suspension authorized by statute for the relevant felony | Brooks: suspension unlawful | Affirmed — statutory authority permitted a suspension between six months and five years for the felony conviction, so the 5-year suspension was lawful |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Rogers, 143 Ohio St.3d 385 (Ohio 2015) (defendant bears burden to show convictions are allied offenses of similar import for plain-error merger review)
- State v. Ruff, 143 Ohio St.3d 114 (Ohio 2015) (framework for determining when multiple offenses arising from same conduct may be separately punished)
- State v. Bonnell, 140 Ohio St.3d 209 (Ohio 2014) (trial court must make R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) findings at sentencing hearing and incorporate them into the judgment entry)