State v. Jung
111 N.E.3d 54
Ohio Ct. App.2018Background
- Matthew Jung pled guilty in three Cuyahoga County cases to: breaking-and-entering (5th° felony) and misdemeanor theft (CR-14-584243), open dumping/burning (unclassified felony under R.C. 3734.03) (CR-14-591390), and receiving stolen property (5th° felony) (CR-14-591534).
- The trial court imposed 18 months of community control in each case, warned Jung at sentencing that violations would result in maximum (and potentially consecutive) prison terms, and made that warning part of the record.
- Jung twice violated community control: (1) tested positive for opiates/heroin (Oct. 2016), and after a hearing was continued on community control with inpatient treatment ordered; (2) absconded from inpatient treatment (Jan. 2017), was arrested in May 2017, admitted the violation and asked for another chance.
- At the second violation hearing the court found Jung not amenable to community control and imposed maximum prison terms: 12 months (CR-14-591534), 12 months plus previously suspended 6 months (CR-14-584243), and 2–4 years (CR-14-591390); the court ordered the terms concurrent and imposed up to three years of postrelease control in each case.
- Jung appealed, arguing (1) maximum felony sentences in two cases were unsupported by the record/failed to consider R.C. 2929.11/2929.12, and (2) the trial court improperly imposed postrelease control for the unclassified felony (R.C. 3734.03).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Jung) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court’s imposition of maximum sentences after community-control violations complied with sentencing statutes | The trial court lawfully resentenced Jung after violations; sentences were within statutory ranges and followed prior notices | Trial court failed to consider R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12; record does not support maximum terms | Affirmed: record supports sentencing; presumption that R.C. 2929.11/2929.12 were considered and sentences not clearly and convincingly contrary to law |
| Whether trial court could impose postrelease control for an unclassified felony (R.C. 3734.03) | Postrelease control was imposed at sentencing | Postrelease control for unclassified felony is unauthorized | Reverse in part: postrelease-control portion for CR-14-591390 vacated; remainder of sentence affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Fraley, 105 Ohio St.3d 13, 821 N.E.2d 995 (Ohio 2004) (trial court must resentence following community-control violation)
- State v. Jackson, 150 Ohio St.3d 362, 81 N.E.3d 1237 (Ohio 2016) (appellate review framework for felony sentencing issues)
- State v. Marcum, 146 Ohio St.3d 516, 59 N.E.3d 1231 (Ohio 2016) (statutory standard under R.C. 2953.08(G)(2) for reviewing felony sentences)
- State v. Clark, 119 Ohio St.3d 239, 893 N.E.2d 462 (Ohio 2008) (postrelease control is not authorized for unclassified felonies)