State v. Chapman, 2016 Ohio 8151

Litrell Chapman was convicted of aggravated murder, aggravated burglary, and aggravated robbery for a May 30, 1996 killing and was originally sentenced April 11, 1997 to life without parole eligibility for 20 years (aggravated murder) and concurrent 10–25 year terms on the burglary and robbery counts.
This court affirmed but remanded in 1998 for resentencing on the burglary and robbery counts under S.B. 2 (Chapman I); the trial court resentenced Chapman to definite 10-year terms on those counts.
The Ohio Supreme Court later held in State v. Rush that S.B. 2 sentencing rules apply only to offenses committed on or after July 1, 1996; Chapman’s offenses occurred May 30, 1996.
The State conceded the trial court erred by imposing definite terms on pre–S.B. 2 offenses when an indeterminate sentence was statutorily required under the pre-S.B. 2 law.
The trial court denied Chapman’s 2016 motion for resentencing; Chapman appealed. The appellate court concluded the definite sentences are not void but must be treated as indeterminate by operation of R.C. 5145.01.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Chapman is entitled to de novo resentencing because the trial court resentenced him to definite terms on pre–S.B. 2 offenses	State: original resentencing to definite terms was error but the sentence can be corrected without a de novo resentencing	Chapman: he is entitled to de novo resentencing on all counts	Court: Sustains in part — no de novo resentencing; trial court must amend entry to reflect indeterminate 10–25 year terms on burglary and robbery by operation of R.C. 5145.01, consecutive to 20-to-life murder sentence

State v. Rush, 83 Ohio St.3d 53 (Ohio 1998) (holding S.B. 2 sentencing provisions apply only to offenses committed on or after July 1, 1996)