State v. Gates, 2022 Ohio 1666

Mark Gates was indicted on aggravated burglary (Count 1), felonious assault (Count 2), and domestic violence (Count 3); Count 1 was amended to fourth-degree burglary; Count 2 is a second-degree felony and Reagan Tokes–eligible.
Gates pled guilty via a Crim.R. 11 colloquy (videoconference) to amended Count 1, Count 2, and Count 3; the court accepted pleas to Counts 1 and 3 on the record and did not explicitly state acceptance of Count 2 but proceeded to sentence.
At sentencing the court imposed 18 months on Count 1, an indefinite Reagan Tokes sentence with a 4-year minimum and 6-year maximum on Count 2, and "time served" on Count 3.
The sentencing entry and transcript do not contain a calculation of jail-time credit for pretrial confinement, and the court did not provide the R.C. 2929.19(B)(2)(c) advisements at sentencing (though the advisements were given during the plea colloquy).
On appeal, Gates raised four assignments of error: (1) jail-time credit applied only to misdemeanor, not felonies; (2) plea to Count 2 was not accepted so sentencing on it was improper; (3) Reagan Tokes sentence is unconstitutional; and (4) the court failed to give required R.C. 2929.19(B)(2)(c) notices.
The appellate court: affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded — ordering calculation/application of jail-time credit and remanding Count 2 only for the required R.C. 2929.19(B)(2)(c) advisements.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Gates)	Held
Jail-time credit calculation	State conceded trial court failed to set/apply jail-time credit in the entry	Trial court applied time served only to misdemeanor and not to concurrent felonies; credit must be calculated and reflected	Court sustained; remanded for calculation, notification to Gates, and amended sentencing entry with credit
Acceptance of guilty plea to Count 2	Plea was accepted (implicitly) — journal entry and sentencing proceed as proof	Plea to Count 2 was never affirmatively accepted, so sentencing on Count 2 was invalid	Court held plea was implicitly accepted; assignment overruled (forfeiture noted)
Constitutionality of Reagan Tokes	State relied on en banc precedent upholding Reagan Tokes	Gates argued due process, Sixth Amendment, separation of powers, and vagueness violations	Court followed en banc Delvallie precedent and rejected Gates’s constitutional claims
Failure to give R.C. 2929.19(B)(2)(c) advisement	State conceded the advisement was not given at sentencing and agreed remand is required	Failure to provide mandatory Reagan Tokes advisements at sentencing warrants reversal on that count	Court reversed Count 2 sentence and remanded for the sole purpose of providing the R.C. 2929.19(B)(2)(c) notifications

State v. Hitchcock, 157 Ohio St.3d 215 (Ohio 2019) (concurrent sentences are presumed absent express consecutive order)
State ex rel. Rankin v. Ohio Adult Parole Auth., 98 Ohio St.3d 476 (Ohio 2003) (trial court must determine jail-time credit)
United States v. Battle, 499 F.3d 315 (4th Cir. 2007) (plea may be implicitly accepted; record controls)
United States v. Head, 340 F.3d 628 (8th Cir. 2003) (conditional or reservation language can indicate plea not accepted)
State v. Delvallie, 173 N.E.3d 544 (8th Dist. 2021) (en banc decision addressing Reagan Tokes challenges)
State v. Rogers, 143 Ohio St.3d 385 (Ohio 2015) (forfeiture rule: arguments forfeited if not timely raised)
State v. Awan, 22 Ohio St.3d 120 (Ohio 1986) (purpose of forfeiture rule: allow correction of errors at trial)