2014 Ohio 5275
Ohio Ct. App.2014Background
- Appellant Darrell Coleman pled guilty in three Cuyahoga County cases after retracting not-guilty pleas.
- Sentencing hearing occurred on December 27, 2013, with a recommended 30 years to life prison term in the plea.
- In CR-13-571165-B, Coleman received life with parole after 30 years for aggravated murder, plus eight-year terms for two counts of aggravated robbery and involuntary manslaughter, all concurrent.
- In CR-13-571726-A, Coleman received an eight-year aggravated robbery sentence to run consecutively to the CR-571165-B term.
- In CR-13-572096-A, Coleman received four eight-year terms for aggravated robbery, concurrent to each other but consecutive to the other counts, for an aggregate life sentence with parole eligibility after 46 years.
- Appellant challenged the consecutive-sentencing scheme for lacking on-record reasons; the court ultimately affirmed but remanded to correct journal entries.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether consecutive sentences require court-stated reasons on the record | Coleman insists record-reason support is required | State contends Bonnell allows no such on-record reasons requirement | No on-record reasons required; Bonnell permits findings but not explicit reasons on record |
| Whether the findings necessary for consecutiveness were properly made | Findings were made but not reflected in journal entries | Findings were stated at sentencing and supported by the record | Findings were made and supported; journal entries must reflect them nunc pro tunc |
| Remedy for missing journal-entry findings | Appellant seeks reversal or resentencing | State seeks to preserve sentence as imposed | Remand for nunc pro tunc entries to include findings and comply with Bonnell |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Bonnell, 140 Ohio St.3d 209 (2014) (no requirement to state reasons on the record for consecutive sentences; findings must appear in journal entry)
- State v. Venes, 992 N.E.2d 453 (8th Dist. Ohio, 2013) (concurrent vs. consecutive findings and record requirements recognized in 8th Dist.)
