State v. Haynes
2014 Ohio 2675
Ohio Ct. App.2014Background
- In December 2010 Michael Haynes pleaded guilty in three Clark County cases to multiple robberies and burglary and was sentenced to four years on each count, ordered to run consecutively for a 16-year aggregate term.
- Trial court judgments also ordered Haynes to "pay all costs of prosecution, Court appointed counsel costs and any fees permitted pursuant to R.C. 2929.18(A)(4)."
- Haynes did not file a direct appeal. In March 2013 he filed motions to correct sentence in each case and separately sought leave for delayed appeal raising overlapping issues.
- The trial court denied the motions to correct sentence; this court denied his motions for leave to file delayed appeal. Haynes appealed the denials of his motions to correct sentence.
- Haynes argued (1) the trial court failed to make statutory findings for consecutive sentences and (2) failed to determine his present/future ability to pay before imposing financial obligations; he also challenged sentencing entries, post-release control, and consideration of R.C. 2929.11/2929.12 factors.
- The trial court’s records showed $2,100 seized from Haynes to be applied toward court costs; the judgments did not indicate specific amounts Haynes still owed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court erred by imposing consecutive sentences without making required statutory findings | State: sentencing was proper as entered | Haynes: court failed to make/findings under R.C. 2929.14 for consecutive terms | Overruled — res judicata bars challenge; no reversible plain error shown; courts need not use talismanic language if record reflects required findings |
| Whether court erred by imposing costs/fees without determining Haynes’s ability to pay | State: costs imposed as permitted; court retains authority to modify/waive costs later | Haynes: trial court did not assess present/future ability to pay before financial sanctions | Overruled — record shows seized funds applied to costs; no evidence court ordered payments exceeding seized amount; court need not assess ability to pay before imposing court costs |
| Whether sentencing entries were incorrect or failed to advise right to appeal (Crim.R. 32(B)) | State: entries valid; procedural requirements satisfied | Haynes: entries were defective and deprived him of rights/required findings | Overruled — arguments could have been raised on direct appeal and are barred by res judicata; delayed appeals were denied |
| Whether trial court failed to impose proper post-release control or consider R.C. 2929.11/2929.12 factors | State: sentencing complied with statutory requirements | Haynes: court failed to notify or properly impose post-release control and did not consider sentencing factors | Overruled — res judicata; issues already ripe for direct appeal but not timely pursued |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Barnes, 94 Ohio St.3d 21 (Ohio 2002) (plain-error standard for unobjected-to trial errors)
- State v. Griffin, 138 Ohio St.3d 108 (Ohio 2013) (res judicata bars issues that were or could have been raised on direct appeal)