State v. Foster, 2013 Ohio 2199

Foster pleaded guilty to receiving stolen property (4th-degree felony), failure to comply (4th-degree felony), and endangering children (1st-degree misdemeanor); other counts were nolled.
Trial court sentenced Foster to 18 months for receiving stolen property, 18 months for failure to comply, and 180 days for child endangerment; the 180-day term was merged with the other two sentences.
The two 18-month sentences were ordered to run consecutively, for a total of 36 months in prison.
Foster fi led two assignments of error challenging sentencing: lack of required findings under R.C. 2921.331 before sentencing for failure to comply, and the use of maximum consecutive sentences.
R.C. 2921.331(C)(5)(b) factors do not apply to a fourth-degree felony failure-to-comply conviction, so the court was not required to consider them.
The appellate court affirmed, concluding the trial court conducted a thorough sentencing analysis and correctly applied the consecutive-sentencing provisions.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the court erred by failing to make required findings under R.C. 2921.331.	Foster argues findings were required for failure to comply.	State contends C(5)(a)/(b) does not apply for a 4th-degree failure-to-comply.	No error; provisions did not apply.
Whether maximum consecutive sentences were properly imposed for receiving stolen property and failure to comply.	Foster argues the court should have made 2929.14(C)(4) findings before imposing consecutive terms.	State asserts 2921.331(D) required consecutive terms; no 2929.14(C)(4) findings needed.	Consecutive sentences mandated; no 2929.14(C)(4) findings required.

State v. Goins, 8th Dist. No. 98256, 2013-Ohio-263 (8th Dist. 2013) (appellate review of sentencing factors; thorough analysis of 2929.12 factors)
State v. Matthews, 8th Dist. No. 97916, 2012-Ohio-5174 (8th Dist. 2012) (requirement that record reflect the court's engagement with sentencing criteria)