State v. Harian, 2012 Ohio 2492

Appellant Clarence Harian appeals four related cases culminating in a 66-month aggregate prison sentence after community control violations.
He was originally indicted in CR-510116 for receiving stolen property and received 36 months of community control.
He later faced separate cases CR-524553, CR-532573, and CR-535298 with additional charges and community control terms.
Multiple revocation hearings were held, each increasing the severity of community control requirements and warning of prison terms for violations.
The court ultimately revoked community control and imposed a 66-month sentence across the four cases, with journal entries later clarified by the appellate court.
The panel addressed several asserted errors, including due process at revocation hearings, evidentiary issues, and the proper imposition and clarity of consecutive sentences.
Court remanded and then affirmed the sentences after determining that the record sufficiently supported the revocation and that the statutory framework at the time did not require certain findings.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Due process at revocation hearing	Harian argues due process was violated in revocation proceedings	Harian contends the hearing lacked proper notice and formal findings	No reversible error; due process satisfied and plain error not shown
Written opinion requirement	Request for a written statement of reasons for revocation	Waived or harmless because record explained reasons	Sufficient record explained the basis for revocation; no prejudice from lack of written opinion
Consecutive sentences without statutory findings	HB 86 changes required findings for consecutive terms	Pre-HB 86 law permitted consecutive sentences without those findings	No error; under former law no mandatory post-HB86 findings were required; sentences within statutory ranges
Transfer while motion for reconsideration pending	Taking Harian to prison while reconsideration was pending violated jurisdiction	Finality of sentence allowed transfer before execution	No error; sentence became final upon issuance; court retained authority to modify prior to execution
Clarity of aggregate sentence in entries	Reported 66 months but actual aggregate was 54 months	Clarified sentences show 66-month aggregate	Entries clarified; actual aggregate remains 66 months; not outside statutory bounds

State v. Davis, 2010-Ohio-5126 (8th Dist. 2010) (due process in probation revocation hearings; notice and record requirements)
State v. Miller, 42 Ohio St.2d 102 (1975) (due process in probation revocation; general requirements)
Gagnon v. Scarpelli, 411 U.S. 778 (1973) (parole/probation revocation due process rights)
Delaney, 11 Ohio St.3d 231 (1984) (written opinion not required if record explains basis for revocation)
State v. Norris, 2010-Ohio-6007 (5th Dist. 2010) (mental illness as basis for revocation and nonwillful violations)
State v. Wallace, 2007-Ohio-3184 (7th Dist. 2007) (evidentiary weight at revocation hearings; substantial evidence standard)
State v. Foster, 109 Ohio St.3d 1 (2006-Ohio-856) (consecutive sentencing framework; findings not required under Foster)
State v. Kalish, 120 Ohio St.3d 23 (2008-Ohio-4912) (aggregate sentence within statutory bounds; sentencing scheme)