State v. Solomon
2019 Ohio 1841
Ohio Ct. App.2019Background
- In Dec. 2014, Izaiah J. Solomon pleaded guilty to aggravated robbery (first-degree felony) and was sentenced to four years of community control (2 years intensive, 2 years general) with notice that an eight-year prison term could be imposed for violation.
- The State filed a motion to revoke in March 2016 alleging drug use, failure to complete evaluation, and new criminal charges; at a June 13, 2016 hearing Solomon admitted new charges and the court continued community control.
- At a Dec. 5, 2016 status conference the court warned Solomon that the next violation could lead to the previously-noticed eight-year term; Solomon was present with counsel.
- The State filed a second motion to revoke on June 14, 2017 alleging missed/late probation reporting; Solomon failed to appear at a July hearing, a warrant issued, and he was arrested.
- At an Aug. 21, 2017 revocation/disposition hearing the court found repeated violations, misstated the number of revocation motions filed, revoked community control, and imposed the eight-year prison term.
- Solomon appealed claiming due process violations: (1) revocation for only minor violations did not justify incarceration; and (2) he was held responsible for violations for which he was not charged. The court affirmed revocation but reversed the sentence for plain error and remanded for resentencing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether revocation of community control for Solomon’s conduct denied due process because violations were minor | State: repeated violations and prior warnings justified revocation | Solomon: violations were minor (late/missed reporting) and did not justify incarceration | Court: No due-process violation; revocation proper despite ‘‘minor’’ nature because of repeated noncompliance and prior opportunities to comply |
| Whether court relied on violations for which Solomon was not charged, denying due process | State: misstatement of number of motions was not basis for revocation | Solomon: court relied on uncharged or unspecified violations and misstatements | Court: Waiver of non-raised claims; no plain error found—misstatement did not affect revocation decision |
| Whether the trial court was required to impose the eight-year prison term upon revocation | State/Court below: court treated the previously-noticed eight years as mandatory | Solomon: argued sentence unjustified or based on erroneous premise | Court of Appeals: Plain error—trial court erred by treating the eight-year term as mandatory; the notice term is a ceiling, not mandatory; sentence reversed and remanded for resentencing within statutory limits (not to exceed eight years) |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Dockery, 187 Ohio App.3d 798 (1st Dist. 2010) (community-control revocation requires minimal due-process and findings supported by substantial evidence)
- State v. Barnes, 94 Ohio St.3d 21 (Ohio 2002) (plain-error standard and cautious application of Crim.R. 52(B))
- State v. Brooks, 103 Ohio St.3d 134 (Ohio 2004) (stated prison term at community-control sentencing is a maximum ceiling, not a mandatory post-revocation sentence)
- State v. Heinz, 146 Ohio St.3d 374 (Ohio 2016) (remand for resentencing when sentencing procedures/statutes require a new, compliant sentencing hearing)