State v. Phipps
2014 Ohio 2905
Ohio Ct. App.2014Background
- Phipps pled guilty to 21 counts across case No. 12CR-6254 in exchange for dismissal of 20 counts and pleaded guilty in two related cases, 12CR-3426 and 12CR-3573.
- The plea covered seven aggravated-robbery counts, four aggravated-burglary counts (three with 3-year gun specs, one with 1-year gun spec), five burglary counts, three kidnapping counts, one felonious assault, and one conspiracy count, all with attached firearm specifications.
- The court imposed an aggregate sentence totaling 172 years and 11 months at the January 25, 2013 sentencing after accepting the pleas, and later conducted a resentencing on June 14, 2013 to issue a corrected judgment.
- The Corrected Re-Sentencing Judgment on July 23, 2013 stated complex, largely consecutive terms, with some firearm specifications running consecutively to underlying terms.
- Appellant challenged Crim.R. 11, sentencing factors, consecutive-sentencing findings, and allied-offense merger; the court remanded for further proceedings on merger and sustained several challenges while overruling others.
- The court ultimately affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for proper proceedings consistent with its decision, with the disposition addressing five issues on appeal
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crim.R. 11 compliance and de facto life exposure | State contends proper Crim.R. 11 compliance showed understanding of maximum penalties | Phipps argues the court failed to convey de facto life exposure and firearm-consecutive terms | Guilty-plea validity upheld; no prejudice shown; substantial compliance; no reversible error on maximum exposure disclosure |
| Adequacy of sentencing factors under R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12 | State asserts proper consideration of sentencing factors and purposes | Phipps contends court failed to adequately weigh factors | Second and third assignments denied; court found proper consideration and weight given to factors; no abuse of discretion on factor application |
| Constitutional/Kalish-style critique of a de facto life sentence for multiple home invasions | State argues sentence reflects the gravity of the offenses and public safety concerns | Phipps argues sentence constitutes de facto life without parole | Denied as to Kalish challenge; sentence not clearly contrary to law under Kalish framework; no automatic reversal |
| Consecutive-sentence findings and statutory compliance under R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) and Crim.R. 32(A)(4) | State contends trial court made the required findings | Phipps argues findings were not explicit and record lacks basis | Plain error found; remand ordered to supply proper findings consistent with statute and case law |
| Allied-offense merger under R.C. 2941.25 for June 20, 2012 incident | State contends counts may stand where separate conduct or animus existed | Phipps argues kidnapping and aggravated robbery should merge | Fifth assignment sustained; Johnson framework requires remand to evaluate whether same-conduct/animus-merger applies; merger resolution remanded |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Kalish, 120 Ohio St.3d 23 (2008-Ohio-4912) (regarding proper scope of sentencing review and proportionality principles)
- State v. Johnson, 128 Ohio St.3d 153 (2010-Ohio-6314) (requires evaluating same-conduct merger before sentencing; Johnson syllabus governs merger analysis)
- State v. Corker, 2013-Ohio-5446 (10th Dist. No. 12AP-264) (applies Johnson framework to merger and remand when record is inconclusive)
- State v. Damron, 10th Dist. No. 12AP-209 (2012-Ohio-5977) (applies Johnson two-step allied-offense analysis on appeal)
- State v. Reeves, 10th Dist. No. 09AP-493 (2010-Ohio-4018) (expresses the practice of noting consideration of sentencing factors on record)