2020 Ohio 3204
Ohio Ct. App.2020Background
- Marc Andrew Shields, Jr. pled guilty to aggravated robbery (R.C. 2911.01(A)(1)) with an accompanying firearm specification; State dismissed related concealed-weapon and tampering counts.
- Trial court sentenced Shields to an indefinite 3 to 4.5 years for aggravated robbery plus a consecutive mandatory 3-year term for the firearm specification under the Reagan Tokes statutory scheme.
- At sentencing Shields asked the court to impose community control on the aggravated robbery to run concurrently with the three-year firearm term, citing State v. Hitchcock and arguing the mandatory prison requirement applied only to the specification.
- The trial court rejected Shields’s request, concluding the firearm specification required prison and that Shields therefore could not receive community control on the underlying offense.
- On appeal the Second District analyzed R.C. 2929.13(F)(8) (mandating prison when a firearm was on/offender during the felony or a firearm specification is pled) and held the statute required a prison term for aggravated robbery where the defendant admitted the firearm specification.
- The court affirmed, ruling the trial court lacked authority to impose community control on the underlying aggravated robbery when the defendant admitted the firearm specification mandating imprisonment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a trial court may impose community control for the underlying aggravated robbery while imposing a mandatory prison term for an accompanying firearm specification | No; statutes provide no authority to impose community control on the underlying offense when a mandatory prison term is required by the firearm-related provision | Yes; R.C. 2929.13(F)(8) mandates prison only for the firearm-specification portion, not necessarily for the underlying offense, so community control on the underlying offense should be permissible | The court held R.C. 2929.13(F)(8) requires a prison term for aggravated robbery when the offender had a firearm or pled a firearm specification, so community control on the underlying offense was not permitted; conviction affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Ervin, 89 N.E.3d 1 (12th Dist. 2017) (discusses ‘‘blended’’ sentences and disallowing community control concurrent with mandatory specification prison term)
- State v. Ford, 945 N.E.2d 498 (Ohio 2011) (addresses merger and treats firearm specification separately from underlying offense for certain purposes)
- State v. Hitchcock, 134 N.E.3d 164 (Ohio 2019) (addressed limits on sentencing options where separate offenses and concurrent sentences are at issue)