State v. Harris, 942 N.E.2d 407

Harris appeals two separate criminal cases challenging the denial of his motions for sentencing.
Case CR-510551: Harris pled guilty to drug trafficking with a forfeiture vehicle; other counts nolled; trial court sentenced six months to run consecutively and forfeiture, but did not suspend his driver’s license as statutorily mandated.
Case CR-510551: The failure to impose the mandatory license suspension renders the sentence void, triggering resentencing.
Case CR-506498: Harris pleaded guilty to drug trafficking (with schoolyard and firearm specifications) and weapons-under-disability; the court imposed five years total but again failed to suspend the license and impose a fine.
CR-506498 involved two journal entries; one for plea and one for sentence, creating a procedural issue that affects finality.
The court held one judgment entry is not a final, appealable order and dismissed the appeal in CR-506498 for lack of jurisdiction, while sustaining the first case and remanding for resentencing.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the missing license suspension and fine voids Harris's sentence.	State argues the omission voids the sentence and requires resentencing.	Harris contends the sentence is not properly void or subject to resentencing due to other factors.	CR-510551 sentence void; remanded for resentencing.
Whether the two-entry judgment in CR-506498 deprives the appeal of final, appealable order.	State contends proper final order exists for review.	Harris argues two judgments create no single final order, depriving appellate jurisdiction.	Appeal dismissed for lack of a final, appealable order.

State v. Donahue, 8th Dist. No. 89111 (2007-Ohio-6825) (void sentences for missing statutorily mandated term; resentencing remedy)
State v. Baker, 119 Ohio St.3d 197 (2008-Ohio-3330) (two journal entries can create finality issues; one document must be final)