State v. Holloway, 2012 Ohio 4936

Holloway was sentenced to 60 days in jail followed by two years of community controlled sanctions.
As part of sanctions, he was ordered to undergo sex offender assessment, counseling, and polygraph examinations per the treatment team’s recommendations.
The journal entry labeled Holloway a Tier sex offender, requiring reporting as a sex offender.
Holloway pleaded guilty to amended aggravated assault; the original indictment involved a sexual abuse allegation against his 9-year-old stepdaughter, who later recanted.
Defense urged community control with treatment rather than prison; prosecutor emphasized strong evidence including DNA and prior reports.
On appeal, the court partially affirms the sentence but sustains concern about the sex offender labeling and remands to vacate that portion.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the sanction labeling him a sex offender was proper	Holloway argues the sanctions are unrelated to the conviction and violate Talty.	Holloway contends labeling as a sex offender is improper when convicted of aggravated assault.	Sex offender labeling reversed; sanctions otherwise affirmed.
Whether Holloway’s sex offender status must be vacated due to lack of conviction/notice	State concedes error due to lack of notice; labeling was not proper.	Holloway argues he was never notified or agreed to ORC 2950 requirements.	Remand to vacate the sex offender labeling; sentence otherwise affirmed.

State v. Talty, 103 Ohio St.3d 177 (2004-Ohio-4888) (adopts Talty test for reasonable community control conditions)
State v. Rohrbaugh, 126 Ohio St.3d 421 (2010-Ohio-3286) (plea to amended indictment not reversible plain error under certain conditions)
Strongsville v. Feliciano, 8th Dist. No. 96294 (2011-Ohio-5394) (comparison showing overbreadth of sanctions where unrelated to the crime)