State v. Taylor, 2017 Ohio 8996

Taylor was convicted (Oct. 5, 2016) of two counts of having weapons under disability (third-degree felonies) and placed on community control; he signed that he understood the conditions.
Probation officer filed a notice of violation after Taylor missed office visits, violated curfew, failed to reside at listed address, traveled to Columbus without permission, and had phone messages/pictures suggesting drugs and firearms.
A March 1, 2017 revocation hearing was held; the court found Taylor violated community control based on probation officer testimony and other record evidence.
The trial court revoked community control and imposed the maximum prison term for a third-degree felony: 36 months plus three years discretionary post-release control.
Taylor appealed, arguing the trial court erred in imposing the maximum 36-month sentence.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether imposition of a 36‑month maximum sentence was contrary to law	State: sentence within statutory range and supported by record; court properly considered R.C. 2929.11/2929.12	Taylor: trial court erred by imposing maximum sentence on revocation appeal	Court: Affirmed — sentence within statutory range; record clearly and convincingly supports sentence and consideration of 2929.11/2929.12
Whether statutory findings (under R.C. 2953.08(G)(2) categories) are unsupported	State: not applicable; statutes cited by Taylor (e.g., R.C. 2929.13(B)/(D), 2929.14(C)(4)) did not apply to his third‑degree weapons offense	Taylor: argued statutory findings required to impose maximum sentence	Court: Those specific statutory provisions did not apply; post‑Foster courts need only consider 2929.11/2929.12 and record here supports the sentence
Whether revocation was supported by sufficient evidence	State: presented substantial proof (more than a scintilla) of violations via officer testimony, texts, photos, travel without permission	Taylor: disputed sufficiency (implicit)	Court: Substantial evidence supported revocation; revocation proceeding standard is substantial proof, not beyond reasonable doubt

State v. Marcum, 146 Ohio St.3d 516 (2016) (standard for appellate review of felony sentences — clear and convincing standard post‑Foster)
State v. Bonnell, 140 Ohio St.3d 209 (2014) (appellate review of sentencing reasonableness and statutory compliance)
State v. Foster, 109 Ohio St.3d 1 (2006) (severed mandatory judicial fact‑finding from sentencing statutes; trial courts retain discretion within statutory ranges)
State v. Kalish, 120 Ohio St.3d 23 (2008) (explains appellate review framework for sentences after Foster)
Cross v. Ledford, 161 Ohio St. 469 (1954) (definition of clear and convincing evidence)
In re Adoption of Holcomb, 18 Ohio St.3d 361 (1985) (discusses clear and convincing standard)
State v. Mathis, 109 Ohio St.3d 54 (2006) (addresses sentencing statutes and the requirement to consider 2929.11/2929.12)