State v. R.S., 2015 Ohio 3194

Appellant R.S. pled guilty to four counts of sexual battery arising from repeated sexual abuse of his daughter from age 12 to 17; remaining rape counts and a specification were dismissed under the plea agreement.
Police discovered the abuse after a friend of the victim confronted R.S. on Facebook and the victim reported the conduct; messages showed R.S. admitting wrongdoing.
At plea and sentencing the court advised R.S. of rights, reviewed sentencing ranges, and ordered a presentence investigation; R.S. was classified as a Tier III sex offender.
The trial court reviewed R.C. 2929.11–.14 factors, found aggravating facts (victim’s age, five-year course of conduct, relationship facilitating the offense, lack of remorse), and concluded recidivism was likely.
The court imposed four consecutive 54‑month prison terms (within the 12–60 month range for third‑degree felonies), five years postrelease control, and costs; R.S. sought a delayed appeal.

Issue	Appellant's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Whether consecutive sentences were supported by the record	Consecutive terms not supported by clear and convincing evidence; court improperly relied on duration of past conduct rather than prospective risk and ignored rehabilitation efforts	Record supports findings: seriousness, harm, continuing course, need to punish and protect public; consecutive sentences appropriate	Affirmed: record contains clear and convincing evidence supporting consecutive sentences under R.C. 2929.14(C)(4)
Whether sentencing entry contained required findings	Entry insufficiently specific; mandatory statutory findings missing from journal entry	Transcript and preprinted entry together show the court considered and made required findings; entry adequate though could be more tailored	Affirmed: judgment entry suffices when record shows the requisite findings were made