State v. Massie
2019 Ohio 2464
Ohio Ct. App.2019Background
- Allan W. Massie pled guilty on December 27, 2017 to two counts of misdemeanor theft in Clark M.C. Nos. 2017-CRB-4227 and 2017-CRB-4293; each count carried a 180-day jail sentence ordered consecutive to each other and to a third 180-day sentence in a separate case.
- Massie served the sentences and was released during the pendency of this appeal.
- The official court recorder’s digital device malfunctioned; no transcript of the plea/sentencing hearing existed.
- Appellant had multiple opportunities and extensions to file an App.R. 9(C)/(D) statement of the proceedings but failed to produce a settled statement; prior appellate counsel also failed to file a brief and was eventually removed.
- New appellate counsel filed a brief and the appeal was submitted without a transcript or settled statement. Massie raised three assignments of error challenging sentence length, denial of allocution, and denial of a meaningful appeal due to lack of transcript.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court erred by imposing maximum, consecutive jail terms | State: sentence was properly imposed by trial court | Massie: sentence was excessive | Overruled as moot — Massie completed the sentences, so no meaningful relief available |
| Whether Massie was denied right to allocution under Crim.R. 32(A)(1) | State: allocution requirement applies but relief limited if sentence completed | Massie: trial court failed to give opportunity to speak; no transcript to prove otherwise | Overruled as moot — any allocution error would affect only sentence and cannot be remedied after sentence served |
| Whether absence of transcript denied Massie a meaningful appeal | State: appellant bears duty to produce record; App.R.9 provides mechanism to create statement when no transcript exists | Massie: inability to obtain recollections made App.R.9 compliance impossible, and lack of transcript prejudiced appeal | Overruled — appellant failed to use App.R.9(C)/(D); all claims were moot because sentence was served, so lack of transcript caused no prejudice |
Key Cases Cited
- Knapp v. Edwards Laboratories, 61 Ohio St.2d 197, 400 N.E.2d 384 (1980) (appellant bears the duty to provide a complete record for appeal)
- State v. Skaggs, 53 Ohio St.2d 162, 372 N.E.2d 1355 (1978) (appellant must show relevance of omissions and utilize App.R. 9 to cure record defects)