2022 Ohio 2137
Ohio Ct. App.2022Background
- Defendant Selena Colon pled guilty to two counts of aggravated vehicular homicide (second-degree felonies), one count of aggravated vehicular assault (third-degree felony), and one count of DUI (first-degree misdemeanor) stemming from a high-speed, alcohol-related crash that killed two occupants and seriously injured a third.
- The plea agreement and advisement included application of the Reagan Tokes Law and notice that sentences could be consecutive or concurrent.
- At sentencing the trial court imposed an indefinite term under Reagan Tokes for Count 1 (6–9 years), fixed terms for Count 2 (6 years) and Count 5 (3 years), ordered Counts 2 and 5 consecutive to Count 1, and Count 7 concurrent.
- The court made consecutive-sentence findings on the record and later filed a nunc pro tunc entry including the statutory findings.
- Colon appealed, arguing (1) the trial court failed to make all required findings under R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) to support consecutive sentences and (2) the Reagan Tokes Law is unconstitutional as applied by imposing an indefinite term.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court made the required R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) findings to impose consecutive sentences | State: trial court expressly found consecutive service was necessary, not disproportionate, and identified the aggravating factor under (C)(4)(b); the record (PSI, briefs, facts of crash) supports findings | Colon: trial court did not make all required statutory findings; alternatively, offenses were a single act and therefore not part of multiple "courses of conduct" under (C)(4)(b) | Court affirmed: findings were made and incorporated into the nunc pro tunc entry; factual links (time, location, same conduct) establish a single course of conduct and the harm justified consecutive terms |
| Whether the Reagan Tokes Law is unconstitutional and the indefinite term improper | State: Reagan Tokes was properly applied; constitutional challenges are for higher review and prior Eighth Dist. decisions govern | Colon: Reagan Tokes is unconstitutional; indefinite sentence invalid | Court rejected the constitutional challenge consistent with State v. Maddox and this court’s en banc Delvallie decision and affirmed the indefinite term |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Marcum, 59 N.E.3d 1231 (Ohio 2016) (articulates R.C. 2953.08(G)(2) standard for reviewing felony sentences)
- State v. Grate, 172 N.E.3d 8 (Ohio 2020) (explains R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) components for consecutive sentences)
- State v. Bonnell, 16 N.E.3d 659 (Ohio 2014) (trial court must make and incorporate statutory consecutive-sentence findings; no rote language required)
- State v. Short, 952 N.E.2d 1121 (Ohio 2011) (a "course of conduct" may be shown by factual links such as time, location, cause, or motive)
- State v. Sapp, 822 N.E.2d 1239 (Ohio 2004) (discusses factors establishing connected offenses for sentencing)
- State v. Delvallie, 185 N.E.3d 536 (8th Dist. 2022) (Eighth District en banc decision addressing constitutionality of Reagan Tokes and applied here)