2011 Ohio 1393
Ohio Ct. App.2011Background
- In 2000, Deaver pleaded guilty to two counts of sexual battery (two third-degree felonies) and received two consecutive five-year terms, was declared a sexual offender, and advised he could be subject to postrelease control.
- In February 2010, the State moved to correct the sentencing entry to indicate five years of mandatory postrelease control.
- In March 2010, a resentencing hearing was held; Deaver was advised of mandatory postrelease control and the remainder of the term was reimposed.
- The sentencing entry stated the court conducted a 'de novo' sentencing hearing, though postrelease-control issues were the focus.
- Deaver has since been released from prison and is serving postrelease control.
- The court remanded for an amended entry to reflect Fischer’s framework and to correct clerical errors.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a de novo resentencing was required after Fischer | Deaver argues de novo is required for failure to notify postrelease control. | State argues Fischer limits remand to proper postrelease-control imposition, not de novo sentencing. | Fischer controls; de novo not required; remand for amended entry only. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Fischer, --- Ohio St.3d. ---, 2010-Ohio-6238 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2010) (postrelease-control notice void portion; remand limited to proper postrelease-control imposition)
- State v. Beasley, 14 Ohio St.3d 74, 471 N.E.2d 774 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1984) (de novo resentencing considerations for postrelease-control failure)
- State v. Bezak, 114 Ohio St.3d 94, 2007-Ohio-3250, 868 N.E.2d 961 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2007) (limits on postrelease-control-related remands)
- State v. Singleton, 124 Ohio St.3d 173, 2009-Ohio-6434, 920 N.E.2d 958 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2009) (postrelease-control framework on appeal)
- State v. Saxon, 109 Ohio St.3d 176, 2006-Ohio-1245, 846 N.E.2d 824 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2006) (remand for issues identified on appeal limited to the error found)
- Baker v. State, 119 Ohio St.3d 197, 2008-Ohio-3330, 893 N.E.2d 163 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2008) (one-document rule for final appealable orders in criminal cases)