State v. McCants
2013 Ohio 2646
Ohio Ct. App.2013Background
- McCants pleaded guilty in 2011 to attempting to possess a concealed weapon and was placed on community control with a warning of a 12‑month prison sentence for violation.
- In 2012, he was indicted for carrying a concealed weapon; accompanying misdemeanors were not pursued by the grand jury.
- A community-control violation was filed based on the weapon charge; the weapon charge was tried separately and McCants was acquitted.
- The amended violation alleged misconduct based on the accompanying misdemeanors; two officers testified to alleged drug activity and CMHA premises trespass.
- At the revocation hearing, testimony included McCants fled from police, discarded marijuana, and a gun allegedly falling from his waistband; a marijuana lab report was admitted.
- The trial court revoked community control and imposed a 12‑month prison term, notwithstanding the acquittal on the weapon charge.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether acquittal on a charge removes factual support for revocation | McCants argues acquittal eliminates basis for revocation. | McCants contends remaining conduct does not support revocation. | No; substantial evidence supported revocation despite acquittal. |
| Due-process adequacy of revocation hearing | State asserts proper procedure and notice were sufficient. | McCants claims due-process flaws (notice, confrontation, neutrality). | Revocation hearing afforded minimal due process; no reversible error shown. |
| Authority to sentence imprisonment after community-control violation | Court may impose imprisonment within statutory range after violation. | McCants contends sentencing lacked required findings. | Imprisonment authorized; within statutory range and no abuse of discretion shown. |
Key Cases Cited
- Barnett v. Adult Parole Auth., 81 Ohio St.3d 385 (1998) (revocation may occur even if underlying charges are dismissed or overturned)
- State v. Sutherlin, 154 Ohio App.3d 765 (2003-Ohio-5265) (revocation supported by remaining evidence after acquittal)
- State v. Craig, 130 Ohio App.3d 639 (1988) (courts may consider evidence surrounding arrest for revocation)
- Castellini, 2012-Ohio-1603 (1st Dist. Nos. C-110445, C-110446) (prison term within range after violation; no abuse of discretion)
- Dunaway, 2002-Ohio-3290 (1st Dist. No. C-010518) (substantial evidence standard for revocation findings)