State v. McGee
2012 Ohio 1829
Ohio Ct. App.2012Background
- McGee, sentenced in August 2008 for two counts each of aggravated robbery and kidnapping, received a combined 12-year term and a consecutive sentence to another case CR-507845.
- On appeal, this court merged the kidnapping counts with the aggravated robbery counts as allied offenses, resulting in seven-year terms for the robberies, concurrent with each other but consecutive to CR-507845.
- Am.Sub.H.B. No. 86 became effective September 30, 2011, reviving provisions of R.C. 2929.14 that McGee contends would yield a shorter minimum term and non-consecutive sentences.
- McGee argues appellate counsel should have asserted HB 86 applies to his case due to its effective date and retroactive-like effect for reopened appeals.
- The court, examining whether HB 86 applies to defendants sentenced before its effective date, denies McGee’s application for reopening.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether HB 86 applies to McGee’s sentence given pre-effective-date sentencing | McGee (appellant) argues HB 86 should apply | State contends HB 86 does not apply to pre-effective-date sentences | No; HB 86 not retroactive to pre-date sentences |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Lindsey, 8th Dist. No. 96601, 2012-Ohio-804 (Ohio 2012) (HB 86 not applicable to pre-effective-date sentences)
- State v. Calliens, 8th Dist. No. 97034, 2012-Ohio-703 (Ohio 2012) (HB 86 did not apply to earlier sentences)
- State v. Ward, 8th Dist. No. 97219, 2012-Ohio-1199 (Ohio 2012) (HB 86 not retroactive to prior sentences)
- State v. Fields, 5th Dist. No. CT11-0037, 2011-Ohio-6044 (Ohio 2011) (denial of HB 86-based sentence reduction)
- State ex rel. Favors v. Cuyahoga Cty. Court of Common Pleas, 8th Dist. No. 97710, 2012-Ohio-1648 (Ohio 2012) (supporting rejection of merits for HB 86 claim)