State v. Jude
2014 Ohio 3441
Ohio Ct. App.2014Background
- On August 15, 2012, Wesley Jude and accomplices robbed two women at gunpoint, took a car, and fled; Jude drove and used a stolen handgun.
- Police later spotted the stolen car; Jude refused to stop, led police on a pursuit, lost control, and was arrested; he had removed an electronic monitor earlier that morning.
- Jude was indicted in Lucas County for aggravated robbery with a firearm specification and failure to comply with a police order; he pleaded guilty to one aggravated robbery (with firearm spec) and one count of failure to comply.
- Before sentencing in Lucas County, Jude was sentenced in Wood County to an aggregate 8-year term on separate motor-vehicle theft and burglary-related convictions.
- The Lucas County court imposed consecutive sentences (10 years for aggravated robbery, 1 year for the firearm spec, and 30 months for failure to comply) and ordered them consecutive to the Wood County sentence, citing R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) factors in its judgment entry and at sentencing.
- Jude appealed, arguing the trial court failed to make the statutory findings required to order the Lucas County sentence consecutive to the earlier Wood County sentence; the Sixth District affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court erred by ordering the Lucas County sentence consecutive to the previously imposed Wood County sentence without required R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) findings on the record | State: the sentencing record and judgment entry show the court made the necessary proportionality and statutory findings to support consecutive sentences | Jude: court did not make the required statutory findings on the record, so consecutive sentence is contrary to law | The court held the judgment entry recited the R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) findings and the record supported them; consecutive sentences were not clearly and convincingly contrary to law, so judgment affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Comer, 99 Ohio St.3d 463, 2003-Ohio-4165, 793 N.E.2d 473 (Ohio 2003) (trial court must state reasons supporting consecutive-sentence findings at sentencing under prior statutory scheme)