2018 Ohio 421
Ohio Ct. App.2018Background
- In 2003 Florence was indicted on aggravated murder (two counts), kidnapping, aggravated robbery, and having weapons while under disability; firearm specifications were included. After trial he was convicted of aggravated murder, murder (lesser included), kidnapping, and having weapons while under disability, plus four firearm specs.
- Sentences: life for aggravated murder; 15 years-to-life for murder; 5 years for kidnapping (all concurrent); 3 years for having weapons while under disability to run consecutively; merged firearm specs produced an additional 3-year term to run consecutively prior to the definite term.
- Original 2004 judgment entry did not state the manner of conviction; nunc pro tunc entries in 2011 alternatively recited a guilty plea and a jury verdict, generating procedural confusion but not disturbed on prior appeals. Florence’s direct appeal was previously affirmed.
- In December 2016 Florence moved to vacate/resentence, arguing the trial court failed at the sentencing hearing to properly notify and impose mandatory post-release control (PRC), in violation of R.C. 2929.19(B)(2)(c).
- The trial court overruled the motion on res judicata grounds and as moot because Florence was serving life terms; the State conceded error limited to PRC on the having-weapons count and agreed remand was necessary to impose the proper PRC for that count.
- On appeal this court held the PRC omission for the having-weapons-while-under-disability count rendered that portion void and remanded solely for resentencing to impose appropriate PRC; the allied-offenses claim (kidnapping vs. aggravated murder) was barred by res judicata and overruled.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether sentence is void for failure to properly impose/notify of mandatory post-release control | State: PRC defects may be raised at any time; remand required only to impose PRC where applicable | Florence: Trial court failed at sentencing to impose 5 years PRC for kidnapping (and generally failed to notify), making sentences void | Court: PRC omission rendered the PRC portion void for the having-weapons count; remanded for resentencing solely to impose appropriate discretionary PRC on Count Five |
| Whether kidnapping and aggravated murder are allied offenses such that separate concurrent sentences are void | State: Res judicata bars claim because it could have been raised on direct appeal | Florence: Kidnapping and aggravated murder are allied; separate sentences are void | Court: Res judicata applies; challenge is barred and overruled |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Fischer, 128 Ohio St.3d 92, 942 N.E.2d 332 (2010) (failure to include required post-release-control notification renders that part of the sentence void and must be set aside)
- State v. Holdcroft, 137 Ohio St.3d 526, 1 N.E.3d 382 (2013) (post-release-control errors are reviewable and may render sentence void)
- State v. Williams, 148 Ohio St.3d 403, 71 N.E.3d 234 (2016) (failure to merge allied offenses renders sentence voidable but such claims are barred by res judicata if not raised on direct appeal)