State v. Leasure
2011 Ohio 3666
Ohio Ct. App.2011Background
- Leasure was convicted of one count of domestic violence (third-degree felony) in 2005 after pleading guilty to the greater offense; the trial court sentenced him to two years and suspended execution, placing him on community control with a journal entry stating up to three years of postrelease control.
- Leasure violated community control on three occasions; the court allowed him to remain on community control after two guilty pleas to violations in 2006 and 2007.
- When he violated again and pled guilty in 2008, the trial court imposed two years of incarceration on the original DV conviction and entered postrelease-control for three years.
- The October 5, 2005 sentencing entry misstated the PDRC term as “up to three years” rather than the statutorily mandated three years; the court had no authority to substitute a different term.
- The August 16, 2010 motion to vacate sought voiding of the October 5, 2005 and April 11, 2008 judgments for improper postrelease-control imposition; the trial court lacked jurisdiction after completion of the sentence, and the appellate court ultimately vacated the void portion of the postrelease-control rulings while affirming the rest.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the postrelease-control portions of the October 5, 2005 and April 11, 2008 judgments were void and require vacatur. | Leasure argues the trial court erred by not voiding all of the postrelease-control terms, making his sentence void. | Leasure contends the court’s postrelease-control imposition was improperly mandated and the entire sentence should be void; the October 2005 entry should be vacated. | Postrelease-control portions are void; only the impermissibly imposed portions are vacated. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Simpkins, 117 Ohio St.3d 420 (2008-Ohio-1197) (s Speech: a sentence not conforming to postrelease-control requires vacatur of the improper portion)
- State v. Fischer, 128 Ohio St.3d 92 (2010-Ohio-6238) (only the invalid postrelease-control portion is vacated; rest remains intact)
- State v. Singleton, 124 Ohio St.3d 173 (2009-Ohio-6434) (requirement that postrelease-control terms and sanctions be in the judgment entry)
- State v. Bezak, 114 Ohio St.3d 94 (2007-Ohio-3250) (Bezak principle: after completion of term, no authority to reimpose postrelease control to correct a flaw)
- State v. Bloomer, 122 Ohio St.3d 200 (2009-Ohio-2462) (void postrelease-control error cannot be remedied by re-sentencing after term completion)