State v. Hargrove, 2014 Ohio 1919

Defendant-appellant John W. Hargrove was convicted by jury of theft (R.C. 2913.02(A)(3)) and solicitation fraud (R.C. 1716.14(A)(1)).
Charges stemmed from fund-raising for a purported veterans’ organization, Ohio Veteran's Source, with the organization not registered as a charitable entity.
Hargrove registered the trade name with the Secretary of State, opened three Huntington Bank accounts in that name, and solicited donations to fund a planned veteran aid newsletter, which he used for his own purposes.
The trial court declined to merge the two offenses for sentencing, imposing separate terms of 12 months (theft) and 18 months (solicitations).
Appellant conceded a prior solicitation fraud conviction from 2007.
On appeal, the court held that the offenses were not allied offenses of similar import and remanded for re-sentencing due to improper consecutive-sentence findings; one assignment of error was overruled and the other sustained.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether theft and solicitation fraud are allied offenses of similar import.	State contends they are not allied offenses given different elements and conduct.	Hargrove argues they were committed with a single animus and should merge.	Not allied offenses; no merger for sentencing.
Whether consecutive sentences were proper without statutory findings.	State argues the findings were not required to be made in the same way given qualifying factors.	Hargrove asserts procedural error in failing to make required findings.	Consecutive sentences reversed and remanded for proper findings under R.C. 2929.14(C).

State v. Johnson, 128 Ohio St.3d 153 (2010-Ohio-6314) (test for allied offenses: same conduct and single animus)
State v. Brown, 119 Ohio St.3d 447 (2008-Ohio-4569) (elements and conduct differ; may not merge absent single conduct)
State v. West, 2013-Ohio-942 (10th Dist. No. 11AP-548) (overlapping elements do not mandate merger)