State v. Tye, 2021 Ohio 2765

Tye was indicted on 34 counts including attempted murder, felonious assault, aggravated robbery, kidnapping, robbery, having weapons while under disability, and failure to comply.
A jury convicted Tye on multiple counts: six aggravated robberies, one kidnapping, one failure to comply, four counts of having weapons while under disability, and three robberies.
The trial court imposed a total prison term of 19 years and entered a sentencing entry that listed individual sentences and identified merged counts for most convictions.
The sentencing entry omitted a sentence for Count 30; it instead stated "Count 30 merges with Count 30." Count 30 was not addressed at sentencing and no other journal entry disposes of it.
At oral argument the parties acknowledged the language was likely a clerical error, but no sentence for Count 30 appears in the record.
Because one convicted count remained undisposed, the appellate court held the sentencing entry was not a final appealable order and dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the sentencing entry is a final appealable order when it fails to dispose of a convicted count	State: entry otherwise set forth convictions/sentences and the Count 30 notation was a clerical mistake	Tye: no sentence was imposed for Count 30, so the entry did not finally dispose of all convictions	Not final; because Count 30 was undisposed, the court lacked jurisdiction and dismissed the appeal
Whether the appellate court may consider Tye's sufficiency and manifest-weight claims	State: parties acknowledged clerical error but argued the record reflects disposition of counts	Tye: his convictions are unsupported by sufficient evidence and against the manifest weight of the evidence	Court did not reach the merits because it lacked jurisdiction; claims not addressed

CitiMortgage, Inc. v. Roznowski, 11 N.E.3d 1140 (Ohio 2014) (appellate jurisdiction limited to review of judgments or final orders)
State v. Baker, 893 N.E.2d 163 (Ohio 2008) (Crim.R. 32(C) and sentencing-entry requirements)
State v. Lester, 958 N.E.2d 142 (Ohio 2011) (elements required in a journalized conviction entry to be final)
State ex rel. Davis v. Cuyahoga Cty. Court of Common Pleas, 936 N.E.2d 41 (Ohio 2010) (sentencing entry must resolve all convictions to be final)
State v. Jackson, 87 N.E.3d 1227 (Ohio 2017) (reiterating requirement that all convicted counts be resolved)
State v. Craig, 151 N.E.3d 574 (Ohio 2020) (an entry disposing of some but not all charges is not final when a count remains pending)