State v. Schmidt
2013 Ohio 1552
Ohio Ct. App.2013Background
- Michael Schmidt pled guilty to breaking and entering (R.C. 2911.13(B)) in Cuyahoga County, alongside co-defendant Robert Kennedy who faced additional charges.
- Appellant and Kennedy were charged by four-count indictment with breaking and entering, theft, possessing criminal tools, and criminal damaging for allegedly stealing car batteries from Sam’s Club around April 27, 2012.
- Trial court imposed the maximum 12-month prison term for the non-violent fifth-degree felony; Schmidt appeals this sentence as error.
- Schmidt argues the mandatory community control provisions of R.C. 2929.13(B)(1)(a) should apply, and that the sentence does not reflect sentencing principles.
- The court conducts Kalish two-step sentencing review, analyzes amendments from HB 86/SB 160, and ultimately holds mandatory community control does not apply for Schmidt; prison term is within the court’s discretion due to bond violations and Schmidt’s conduct.
- Judgment affirmed; case remanded for execution of sentence; costs assessed to Schmidt.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether mandatory community control applies | State argues SB 160 amendments negate mandatory control if prior felonies exist | Schmidt argues mandatory control should apply under prior law | Not applicable; court has discretion to impose prison term due to bond violations |
| Whether the prison sentence was an abuse of discretion | State asserts sentence within permissible discretion given prior violations | Schmidt contends sentence is excessive for non-violent felony | Sentence not clearly and convincingly contrary to law; within the court’s discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Kalish, 120 Ohio St.3d 23 (2008) (two-step analysis for sentencing review; required findings may apply to consecutive sentencing)
- State v. Johnson, 8th Dist. No. 98245, 2013-Ohio-575 (Ohio 8th Dist. 2013) (mandatory community control considerations under prior law)
- State v. Hodge, 128 Ohio St.3d 1, 2010-Ohio-6320 (Ohio Supreme Court 2010) (rebuts retroactivity concerns; HB 86 amendments discussed)