State v. Grant
2014 Ohio 2656
Ohio Ct. App.2014Background
- Michael Grant was indicted in two consolidated Cuyahoga County cases for burglary/theft and multiple sexual offenses and aggravated robbery arising from incidents in Dec 2012–Jan 2013.
- He pled guilty by amended indictment to seven counts: multiple rape counts (some with three-year firearm specs and sexually violent predator specs) and one aggravated robbery with a three-year firearm specification.
- The trial court imposed an aggregate sentence of 58 years to life, mandatory postrelease control, and Tier III sex-offender classification.
- Grant appealed, raising (1) that the court erred in ordering consecutive sentences without required R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) findings and (2) that court costs were imposed in the journal entry though not spoken in open court.
- The state conceded the court did not announce costs at sentencing. The trial record contained victim impact details and the court’s oral statements explaining the sentence.
- The court of appeals affirmed the sentence as supported by the record but reversed and remanded the imposition of costs so Grant could request a waiver because costs were not imposed in open court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether consecutive sentences were lawful under R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) | Court contends record supports required findings (necessity, non-disproportionality, and at least one subsection (a)-(c)) | Grant contends court failed to make the statutorily required findings on the record before imposing consecutive terms | Affirmed: court’s oral statements satisfied the statutory findings and the record supports consecutive terms |
| Whether court costs may be imposed when not announced in open court | State concedes costs were not announced and acknowledges remand is required | Grant argues imposition in the journal entry without announcement violated Crim.R. 43 and Joseph | Reversed and remanded limitedly to allow Grant to seek waiver of costs; costs vacated until court addresses waiver in open court |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Venes, 992 N.E.2d 453 (Ohio App.) (appellate review standard and requirements for reversing consecutive sentences)
- State v. Jones, 754 N.E.2d 1252 (Ohio 2001) (failure to make required consecutive-sentence findings is contrary to law)
- State v. Joseph, 926 N.E.2d 278 (Ohio 2010) (trial court must impose costs in open court; failure requires limited remand to allow defendant to seek waiver)
- State v. White, 817 N.E.2d 393 (Ohio 2004) (R.C. 2947.23 requires imposition of prosecution costs against convicted defendants)