State v. Frazier
2011 Ohio 5445
Ohio Ct. App.2011Background
- Frazier was indicted in two Shelby County cases: 08CR00306 for burglary in the second degree and 10CR00125 with eight burglary counts (fourth degree).
- The 2008 case proceeded to a jury trial, resulting in a guilty verdict on the sole burglary count (second degree).
- In 2010, Frazier pled guilty to three counts of receiving stolen property in the 2010 case, with five remaining counts dismissed, pursuant to a plea agreement.
- Sentencing on February 11, 2011 imposed six years for the second-degree burglary and eleven months on each of the three receiving-stolen-property counts, to be served consecutively for a total of eight years and nine months.
- Frazier appealed arguing the court failed to make required findings before imposing consecutive sentences and that the sentence was excessive.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Consecutive-sentencing findings | Frazier argues the court failed to make required findings under RC 2929.14(E)(4) before imposing consecutive terms. | Frazier contends the court was obligated to state specific findings prior to consecutive sentencing. | No error; Foster permits discretion without those findings. |
| Lawfulness of aggregate sentence | Frazier contends the aggregate eight years nine months is excessive and not aligned with statutory ranges. | Frazier maintains the sentence exceeds appropriate severity given the offenses. | Sentence within statutory ranges and not contrary to law. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Foster, 109 Ohio St.3d 1 (2006-Ohio-856) (trial court full discretion; no judicial fact-finding required for consecutive terms)
- State v. Kalish, 120 Ohio St.3d 23 (2008-Ohio-4912) (two-part abuse-of-discretion framework for felony sentencing)
- State v. Daughenbaugh, 3rd Dist. No. 16-07-07, 2007-Ohio-5774 (2007-Ohio-5774) (meaningful review standard for upholding felony sentences)
- State v. Carter, 2004-Ohio-1181 (2004-Ohio-1181) (reaffirms standards for reviewing sentencing decisions)
- In re Estate of Haynes, 25 Ohio St.3d 101 (1986-Ohio-) (clear-and-convincing standard of proof described)