State v. Redmyer
2017 Ohio 572
Ohio Ct. App.2017Background
- Redmyer was indicted in Medina County on three burglary counts and three grand theft counts, each with firearm specifications, related to three separate invasions of the same Medina home in November 2013.
- The State amended the indictment, dismissing one grand theft count and several firearm specifications, and clarifying the value of the stolen property; Redmyer pled no contest to the amended charges.
- The trial court sentenced Redmyer to a seven-year aggregate prison term, with $75,000 restitution and an “optional” post-release control term.
- Redmyer appealed claiming (1) mis-merger of counts for sentencing, (2) improper imposition of consecutive sentences, and (3) restitution should be joint and several.
- The appellate court affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for further proceedings, including clarification of consecutive-sentences findings and post-release control issuance.
- Post-Release Control was deemed mandatory for the offense of violence, requiring remand for proper address of post-release control on remand.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Merger of counts for sentencing | Redmyer argues counts IV and VI should merge into I and III. | State contends there were separate offenses with distinct harms. | First assignment overruled; no merger required. |
| Consecutive-sentences findings | Redmyer asserts the court failed to make proper R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) findings to impose consecutive terms. | State asserts findings were made but were not properly reflected in the entry. | Second assignment sustained; remand to clarify findings. |
| Restitution against co-defendants | Redmyer challenges the restitution order as not joint and several. | State argues one defendant can bear full restitution where acts were concerted. | Third assignment overruled; restitution held proper under statute and case law. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Williams, 134 Ohio St.3d 482 (2012-Ohio-5699) (merger analysis under R.C. 2941.25; de novo review standard)
- State v. Underwood, 124 Ohio St.3d 365 (2010-Ohio-1) (Double Jeopardy; allied offenses and separate offenses)
- State v. Ruff, 143 Ohio St.3d 114 (2015-Ohio-995) (discrete harms and separate animus required for multiple convictions)
- State v. Bonnell, 140 Ohio St.3d 209 (2014-Ohio-3177) (consecutive-sentences findings required at sentencing; supported by record)
- State v. Evett, 2015-Ohio-2722 (9th Dist. Medina No. 14CA0008-M) (distinguishes burglary vs. theft timing for successive offenses)
- State v. Dembie, 2015-Ohio-2888 (9th Dist. Lorain No. 14CA010527) (merger and allied-offense considerations in sentencing)