State v. Pippin, 2016 Ohio 312

Tony Pippin was indicted on multiple counts, and ten counts (11–20) relating to victim M.B. were severed for plea/trial.
After the trial court denied a suppression motion, Pippin pleaded no contest to those ten severed counts; the court accepted the pleas and found him guilty.
At sentencing, counsel and the prosecutor stipulated that four counts (12, 13, 15, 16) should merge into two rape counts and four pandering counts.
The trial court, however, did not formally dispose of (merge or dismiss) counts 12, 13, 15, and 16 in its sentencing entry, leaving them unresolved in the judgment entry.
The court of appeals held that because the trial court failed to dispose of all charges in the action, the judgment entry was not a final order and the appellate court lacked jurisdiction; the appeal was dismissed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the judgment entry is a final order under Ohio law	The State argued the convictions and sentencing for the resolved counts constituted a final order allowing appeal	Pippin argued the unresolved counts prevented finality and thus the appeal	The court held the order was not final because four charges remained undetermined, so appellate jurisdiction was lacking
Whether failure to comply with Crim.R. 32(C) affects finality	State implied sentencing entry was sufficient	Pippin argued Crim.R. 32(C) requires disposition of all charges for final judgment	The court held noncompliance with Crim.R. 32(C) (leaving charges unresolved) prevents finality
Whether a "hanging charge" can prevent final order under R.C. 2505.02(B)(1)	State did not successfully show the unresolved counts did not affect substantial rights	Pippin argued that hanging charges prevent the order from determining the action	The court held a hanging charge prevents finality under R.C. 2505.02(B)(1) because it does not determine the action
Whether stipulation at sentencing cures the failure to dispose of charges	State relied on the stipulation of counsel that counts should merge	Pippin argued stipulation without formal disposition is insufficient	The court held stipulation alone, without formal disposition in the judgment entry, does not render the order final

State v. Baker, 893 N.E.2d 163 (Ohio 2008) (Crim.R. 32(C) compliance is required for a criminal judgment to be a final order)
State v. Lester, 958 N.E.2d 142 (Ohio 2011) (reaffirming that Crim.R. 32(C) is necessary for finality of conviction orders)
State v. Brown, 569 N.E.2d 1068 (Ohio Ct. App. 1989) (leaving a charge unresolved renders the judgment nonfinal)