State v. Davidson, 2022 Ohio 694

In Nov. 2020 a grand jury indicted Javon Davidson on multiple felonies including aggravated robbery, robbery, felonious assault, theft, and having weapons while under disability; several counts carried one- and three-year firearm specifications.
On Mar. 2, 2021 Davidson pleaded guilty to: second-degree robbery with a three-year firearm specification, second-degree felonious assault, and third-degree having weapons while under disability; the state nolled remaining counts.
The trial court imposed the three-year firearm specification consecutive and prior to a two-year robbery term, and concurrent two-year terms on the other convictions, yielding an aggregate minimum of five years and a maximum of six years; three years postrelease control was ordered on the robbery.
Davidson appealed, arguing the Reagan Tokes Law (indefinite sentencing) is unconstitutional under the jury-trial right, separation-of-powers, and due-process clauses.
This court, relying on its en banc decision in State v. Delvallie, rejected Davidson’s constitutional challenges and affirmed the sentence.
The court sua sponte found clerical errors in the trial court’s Apr. 1, 2021 nunc pro tunc entry (incorrectly stating an 8–12 year range) and remanded for a nunc pro tunc entry to reflect the actual 5–6 year aggregate sentence.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Constitutionality of Reagan Tokes indefinite sentence	State: Reagan Tokes is constitutional; sentence valid	Davidson: Reagan Tokes violates Article I §5 and the Sixth Amendment (jury right), separation-of-powers, and due process (Article I §16 and Fourteenth Amendment)	Court: Overruled Davidson’s challenges under en banc Delvallie; sentence upheld
Clerical errors in judgment entry / need for nunc pro tunc correction	State did not contest correction	Davidson did not raise; error noted by court	Court: Sua sponte remanded for nunc pro tunc to correct entry to 5-year minimum / 6-year maximum and remove erroneous 8–12 year language

State ex rel. Cruzado v. Zaleski, 856 N.E.2d 263 (Ohio 2006) (trial courts retain authority to correct clerical errors in judgments)
State v. Brown, 737 N.E.2d 1057 (Ohio Ct. App. 2000) (defining clerical mistakes as mechanical and apparent on the record)
Dentsply Internatl., Inc. v. Kostas, 498 N.E.2d 1079 (Ohio Ct. App. 1985) (nunc pro tunc entries limited to reflecting what the court actually decided)
State ex rel. Mayer v. Henson, 779 N.E.2d 223 (Ohio 2002) (nunc pro tunc entries cannot alter substantive rulings)
State ex rel. Fogle v. Steiner, 656 N.E.2d 1288 (Ohio 1995) (clarifies limits on nunc pro tunc relief)