2023 Ohio 534
Ohio Ct. App.2023Background
- Defendant Julius Potter pleaded guilty to felonious assault (with firearm specifications), having a weapon while under disability, and resisting arrest.
- The trial court sentenced Potter to a total of five years but explicitly refused to apply the indefinite-sentence provisions of S.B. 201 (the Reagan Tokes Law), finding them unconstitutional.
- The state appealed, arguing the trial court plainly erred by not imposing Reagan Tokes indefinite sentences.
- Under Ohio law, the state may appeal a sentence that is contrary to law; a sentence that omits a mandatory provision is contrary to law.
- This court previously, en banc in State v. Delvallie, held the Reagan Tokes Law constitutional and overruled the arguments Potter raised here.
- Because the trial court failed to impose the mandatory indefinite terms, the appellate court reversed and remanded for resentencing under Reagan Tokes.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court erred by declaring S.B. 201 unconstitutional and refusing to impose Reagan Tokes indefinite sentences | Trial court must apply S.B. 201; its indefinite terms are mandatory | S.B. 201’s indefinite sentencing provisions are unconstitutional | Reversed: Reagan Tokes upheld (Delvallie); sentence was contrary to law for omitting mandatory indefinite terms; remanded for resentencing |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Delvallie, 185 N.E.3d 538 (8th Dist. 2022) (en banc decision upholding the Reagan Tokes Law)
- State v. Underwood, 922 N.E.2d 923 (Ohio 2010) (a sentence that omits a mandatory statutory provision is contrary to law)