State v. Holcomb
2017 Ohio 2579
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Appellant Kevin Holcomb was indicted for aggravated robbery (with firearm and gang specifications), having a weapon under disability, and participating in a criminal gang (second-degree felony); he pled guilty to gang participation and the other counts were dismissed.
- The charged incident occurred December 1, 2015; the victim identified Holcomb as one of three offenders who took property while a codefendant held a gun to the victim’s head.
- At plea/sentencing the court noted Holcomb’s long-standing X-Blocc gang membership since 2007, extensive misdemeanor convictions (24), at least one prior felony, juvenile felonies, prior probation violations, active warrants, and a failed judicial-release/probation discharge.
- Sentencing occurred May 4–5, 2016; the court imposed five years incarceration (within the 2–8 year statutory range for a second-degree felony) plus three years postrelease control.
- Holcomb appealed solely arguing the sentence was contrary to law as excessive and inconsistent with his codefendant’s lighter sentence.
- The Sixth District Court of Appeals affirmed, finding the record supports that the trial court considered R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12 factors and that the sentence was within the statutory range and not disproportionate.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the sentence was contrary to law/excessive because it was disproportionate to a codefendant’s sentence | Holcomb: his five-year term is excessive and inconsistent compared to codefendant’s two-year sentence | State: sentencing court considered statutory factors (R.C. 2929.11/2929.12); record supports the sentence and differences in criminal histories justify disparity | Court held sentence not contrary to law; affirmed five-year term as within statutory range and supported by record |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Arnett, 88 Ohio St.3d 208, 724 N.E.2d 793 (Ohio 2000) (a sentencing court need not use specific language or make particularized findings to show it considered the seriousness and recidivism factors in R.C. 2929.12)