State v. Saplak
2012 Ohio 4281
Ohio Ct. App.2012Background
- Saplak was indicted in Sept 2011 for theft of property ($500–$5,000) and possessing criminal tools, with a forfeiture specification.
- The offense occurred between August 9 and September 9, 2011.
- On Oct 18, 2011 Saplak pled guilty to theft; other charges were dismissed; the property was identified as $665.20 worth of beer at Marc’s.
- A capias issued after Saplak failed to appear for sentencing; he was ultimately sentenced on Jan 5, 2012 to six months in prison and up to three years of postrelease control, with restitution.
- HB 86, effective Sept 30, 2011, amended R.C. 2913.02 to reduce the offense for under $1,000 theft to a first-degree misdemeanor; issue is whether this applies to Saplak.
- The court later vacated the postrelease control and remanded for resentencing, affirming the conviction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether plea voided by HB 86 retroactivity | Saplak contends the offense became a misdemeanor after HB 86. | Saplak argues the pre-HB86 offense remains a felony and sentencing was improper. | No; conviction affirmed, but no postrelease control due to amended offense. |
| Whether postrelease control applied to the offense | Because the offense is now a misdemeanor, postrelease control should not apply. | The trial court imposed postrelease control as for a felony. | Because HB 86 changes apply to the offense, no postrelease control is imposed. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Steinfurth, 2012-Ohio-3257 (8th Dist. No. 97549, 2012) (HB 86 amendments apply to offenses committed before but sentenced after effective date)
- State v. Burton, 11 Ohio App.3d 261 (10th Dist.1983) (RR reduction principle under R.C. 1.58 limited to reduced punishment, not offense)
- State v. Collier, 22 Ohio App.3d 25 (3rd Dist.1984) (R.C. 1.58 benefits do not extend to amending offense)