State v. Ross, 2015 Ohio 3399

Michael Ross, former Lorain County commissioner, was convicted by a jury in 2009 of multiple offenses including engaging in a pattern of corrupt activity, conspiracy, money laundering, bribery, unlawful interest in a public contract, and filing a false/incomplete tax return.
The trial court originally imposed a total sentence of 9.5 years (combining multi-year and concurrent/consecutive terms across counts).
On direct appeal this court affirmed convictions but reversed Ross’s sentence and remanded for resentencing because the trial court had enhanced certain counts without required jury findings and had not analyzed allied-offense issues under State v. Johnson.
On remand the trial court: (a) merged the pattern-of-corrupt-activity and conspiracy counts and re-sentenced on the elected count, and (b) re-sentenced other counts (money laundering, bribery, unlawful-interest, and tax return) de novo, altering concurrent/consecutive designations and increasing the tax-count term.
Ross appealed the resentencing, arguing the court lacked authority to de novo resentenced counts that were not affected by the appellate error; the Court of Appeals agreed and vacated the resentencing for those unaffected counts.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether trial court could de novo resentenced counts not implicated by the remand	Ross: court exceeded authority by altering sentences for counts not affected by the appeal	State: remand allowed de novo resentencing generally; trial court acted within scope	Held: Resentencing power is limited; counts not affected by appealed error were not subject to de novo resentencing and must be returned to original terms
Whether allied-offense analysis on remand permitted reconfiguration of sentences for other counts	Ross: allied-offense review was limited to counts at issue; did not open unaffected counts	State: court’s application of Johnson justified reexamination of sentencing structure	Held: Only offenses affected by allied-offense error may be resentenced; other sentences remain intact
Whether the trial court properly merged pattern and conspiracy counts and elected a count for sentencing	State: merger appropriate under Johnson; election permitted	Ross: did not dispute merger outcome on appeal	Held: Trial court correctly merged those counts and proceeded on elected count
Remedy when trial court alters unaffected sentences on remand	Ross: vacate altered sentences and remand to re-impose original sentences	State: no specific alternative relief urged	Held: Vacation of the altered sentences and remand to re-impose the original sentences for those counts

State v. Wilson, 129 Ohio St.3d 214 (Ohio 2011) (remand for resentencing is generally de novo but may be limited; only offenses affected by allied-offense errors are subject to de novo resentencing)
State v. Saxon, 109 Ohio St.3d 176 (Ohio 2006) (sentences not vacated by appealable error are not subject to review on remand)
State v. Johnson, 128 Ohio St.3d 153 (Ohio 2010) (framework for determining whether offenses are allied and must be merged for sentencing)