State v. Quinones
2012 Ohio 1939
Ohio Ct. App.2012Background
- In 2009 Quinones was convicted by a jury of two counts of rape and two counts of sexual battery.
- The trial court sentenced three years for rape and two years for sexual battery, running consecutively for a total of five years.
- On direct appeal this court held only one rape count survived and the sexual-battery counts were allied offenses; remanded for resentencing with the state to elect whether to proceed on rape or battery.
- On remand the state elected rape; the court imposed a five-year total sentence, stating it had always intended five years regardless of surviving counts.
- Quinones argued the remand sentence violated due process and that the court improperly pursued a “sentencing package.”
- The court concluded Ohio does not recognize a sentencing-package doctrine; reversed, and remanded to impose a three-year term on the rape count.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether remand for allied-offenses resentencing permits increasing sentence. | Quinones | Quinones | Remand cannot increase sentence under vindictiveness or packaging doctrine |
| Whether the trial court’s increased rape term reflected a sentencing package. | Quinones | State | Ohio disallows sentencing-packaging; reversed for independent per-offense sentences |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Wilson, 129 Ohio St.3d 214 (2011-Ohio-2669) (remand for allied-offenses sentencing limits scope of re-sentencing)
- State v. Whitfield, 124 Ohio St.3d 319 (2010-Ohio-2) (gives framework for scope of remand; sentences affected reviewed de novo)
- State v. Saxon, 109 Ohio St.3d 176 (2006-Ohio-1245) (sentencing-package doctrine in Ohio is inapplicable; sentences are per-offense)
- Pimienta-Redondo, 874 F.2d 9 (1st Cir.1989) (federal sentencing package concept; overarching plan for multiple counts)
- North Carolina v. Pearce, 395 U.S. 711 (1969) (principle permitting new sentencing information post-conviction under due process)
- Wasman v. United States, 468 U.S. 559 (1984) (new light on defendant after original sentencing may justify reconsideration)
- State v. Kalish, 120 Ohio St.3d 23 (2008-Ohio-4912) (standard of review for felony sentences is abuse of discretion absent lawfulness)
- State v. Foster, 109 Ohio St.3d 1 (2006-Ohio-856) (reconceptualizes de novo resentencing and discretion limits)
- State v. Jackson, 8th Dist. No. 92365 (2009-Ohio-4995) (de novo resentencing framework and limits)
- State v. Douse, 8th Dist. No. 82008 (2003-Ohio-5238) (vindictiveness presumption related to increased sentence upon appeal)