2022 Ohio 451
Ohio Ct. App.2022Background
- Terence Thomas was indicted on five felonies; count five charged receiving stolen property (R.C. 2913.51(A)) as a fifth‑degree felony.
- Under a plea agreement the state dismissed one count and agreed to reduce count five to a first‑degree misdemeanor; Thomas pleaded guilty to the amended count five.
- At the plea hearing the court advised Thomas that count five was a first‑degree misdemeanor (maximum 180 days jail, $1,000 fine) and journalized the guilty plea to an M1.
- Despite the plea, the court’s probation/victim‑impact paperwork and the sentencing entry described count five as a fifth‑degree felony.
- At sentencing the court imposed a 12‑month Department of Corrections term on count five (concurrent with a 40‑month aggregate on other counts). Thomas appealed only the count‑five sentence.
- The appellate court held the felony sentence was unauthorized because Thomas had been convicted only of a misdemeanor; it vacated the count‑five sentence and remanded for resentencing.
Issues
| Issue | State's Argument | Thomas's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court may impose a felony sentence when the defendant pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor amendment of the charge | The State acknowledged the plea was to a misdemeanor but urged the appellate court to correct or modify the sentencing entry rather than remand | The sentence was plain error: the court imposed a felony sentence without an underlying felony conviction, an unauthorized penalty | The court held the felony sentence was contrary to law, constituted plain error, vacated the count‑five sentence, and remanded for resentencing |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Jones, 169 N.E.3d 649 (Ohio 2020) (defines “contrary to law” for appellate sentence review)
- State v. Paige, 103 N.E.3d 800 (Ohio 2018) (trial courts must impose only statutory sentences)
- State v. Anderson, 35 N.E.3d 512 (Ohio 2015) (trial court sentencing constrained by statute)
- State v. Harris, 972 N.E.2d 509 (Ohio 2012) (definition of criminal sentence as statutory penalty)
- State v. Hitchcock, 134 N.E.3d 164 (Ohio 2019) (sentencing discretion still limited to statutory authorization)
- State v. Fischer, 942 N.E.2d 332 (Ohio 2010) (when no discretion exists, appellate correction without remand may be proper)
- Colegrove v. Burns, 195 N.E.2d 811 (Ohio 1964) (crimes and penalties are statutory)
- State v. Hessler, 734 N.E.2d 1237 (Ohio 2000) (plain‑error analysis after failure to object at sentencing)
- State v. Fields, 646 N.E.2d 866 (Ohio Ct. App.) (prejudice requirement under plain‑error doctrine)