2018 Ohio 3197
Ohio Ct. App.2018Background
- Steven H. Miller, III was indicted on felonious assault (2nd-degree) with a gun specification and tampering with evidence; after a traffic stop police found >27g cocaine and he was separately indicted for first-degree possession. The cases were consolidated.
- Miller pled guilty to felonious assault and to possession of cocaine in exchange for dismissal of the gun specification and tampering charge; the State agreed to stand silent at sentencing.
- Presentence investigation was conducted; at the disposition hearing the trial court imposed 7 years for felonious assault and 7 years for cocaine possession, ordered consecutively (total 14 years).
- At the sentencing hearing the court made one of the required R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) findings (that at least two offenses were part of one or more courses of conduct and caused great or unusual harm) but failed to verbally make the required findings that consecutive sentences were "necessary" to protect the public or to punish and that they were not disproportionate.
- The State conceded error under local rule that the trial court failed to make the R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) findings at the sentencing hearing and requested remand for a new sentencing hearing; the court agreed and vacated the sentence and remanded.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court must make the statutory consecutive-sentence findings at the sentencing hearing | State conceded the court erred by not making all required findings on the record at sentencing under R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) | Miller argued the court omitted two required findings at the hearing (necessity and non-disproportionality) contrary to Bonnell | Trial court erred; remand for a new sentencing hearing (conceded error sustained) |
| Whether the record supports the court's R.C. 2929.14(C)(4)(b) finding that harm from multiple offenses was "great or unusual" | State did not contest on appeal due to concession | Miller argued possession of cocaine did not cause identifiable victim harm and thus did not support the "great or unusual" harm finding | Moot on appeal because sentencing error required remand; appellate court declined to decide (overruled as moot) |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Bonnell, 16 N.E.3d 659 (Ohio 2014) (trial courts must make the R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) consecutive-sentence findings on the record at sentencing and incorporate them in the entry)
- BP Oil Co. v. Dayton Bd. of Zoning Appeals, 672 N.E.2d 256 (Ohio Ct. App. 1996) (courts will not issue advisory opinions)
- State v. Jones, 94 N.E.3d 971 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017) (appellate courts avoid advisory rulings)