State v. Davenport
2012 Ohio 4013
Ohio Ct. App.2012Background
- Davenport pled guilty to one count of receiving stolen property and one count of domestic violence in Defiance County cases 08 CR 10352 and 08 CR 10401, with prior reserved terms of imprisonment.
- In 2009 the trial court sentenced Davenport to four years of community control in both cases, reserving nine months in 08 CR 10352 and five years in 08 CR 10401.
- In November 2011, Davenport was accused of domestic violence in Van Wert County; charges were filed and later dismissed, while motions to revoke community control were filed in Defiance County.
- December 21, 2011 adjudicatory hearing found Davenport violated community control; trial court revoked control and imposed the previously reserved terms (nine months 08 CR 10352; five years 08 CR 10401), ordering consecutive service for a total five years nine months.
- Davenport filed notices of appeal in January 2012; the appeals were consolidated as 4-12-05 and 4-12-06.
- On appeal, the court affirmed the revocation, but vacated the PRC portion in case 4-12-06 and remanded for an RC. 2929.191 hearing to properly impose mandatory three-year post-release control.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether revocation of community control was proper where underlying charges were dismissed | Davenport contends the violation lacked support after the DV charges were dismissed. | Davenport contends the court erred by revoking control based on dismissed underlying conduct. | Revocation upheld; underlying evidence supported violation despite dismissal. |
| Whether the revocation of community control was an abuse of discretion | State argues substantial evidence supported the violation. | Davenport argues the court abused its discretion in revoking control. | No abuse of discretion; court properly found violations and revoked control. |
| Whether PRC notice was proper and whether mandatory three years were imposed | State argues PRC was properly noticed for the applicable case. | Davenport argues notice did not reflect mandatory three-year PRC for the third-degree DV offense. | PRC for case 08 CR 10401 vacated; remanded for proper 2929.191 hearing to impose mandatory three years. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Jordan, 104 Ohio St.3d 21 (2004) (mandatory/post-release control notice requirement)
- State v. Fischer, 128 Ohio St.3d 92 (2010) (proper correction when PRC notice deficient)
- State v. Bezak, 114 Ohio St.3d 94 (2007) (PRC, Bezak framework for correction)