State v. Carmel, 2014 Ohio 1209

Carmel pled guilty to five counts of gross sexual imposition in January 2013 and was sentenced to 36 months per count, to be served consecutively for a total of 15 years.
The trial court also classified Carmel as a Tier II Sexually-Oriented Offender with five years of post-release control.
Carmel appealed challenging the trial court’s imposition of consecutive sentences without the required RC 2929.14(C)(4) findings on the record at sentencing.
At the sentencing hearing, the court verbally addressed various considerations but did not make the RC 2929.14(C)(4) findings on the record, though the sentencing journal entry later included such findings.
The State conceded the findings were not made on the record at the sentencing hearing.
The Court of Appeals held the trial court failed to make the necessary RC 2929.14(C)(4) findings at the sentencing hearing and sustained Carmel’s assignment of error, reversing and remanding for resentencing.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether consecutive sentences require on-record findings under RC 2929.14(C)(4)	Carmel argues the court failed to make required findings on the record.	State contends findings were in the sentencing entry, not necessarily on the hearing record.	Findings not made on the record; reversed and remanded.

State v. Kalish, 120 Ohio St.3d 23, 2008-Ohio-4912 (Ohio 2008) (two-step review of felony sentences; compliance first, then abuse of discretion)
State v. Brooks, 9th Dist. Summit Nos. 26437, 26352, 2013-Ohio-2169 (Ohio 2013) (findings under RC 2929.14(C)(4) must be made on the record at sentencing)
State v. Linde, 9th Dist. Summit No. 26714, 2013-Ohio-3503 (Ohio 2013) (distance between recording findings in entry vs. on-record sentencing analyzed)