State v. Wheeler, 2021 Ohio 1074

Brandon K. Wheeler was indicted for third-degree felony failure to comply with a police order and first-degree misdemeanor petty theft arising from shoplifting and a high‑speed, 25‑mile police chase reaching over 100 mph.
Wheeler pleaded guilty after a Crim.R. 11 colloquy; sentencing was continued for a presentence investigation.
At sentencing the trial court imposed the maximum 36‑month prison term for failure to comply and 180 days for petty theft, to be served concurrently, citing Wheeler’s extensive prior theft and traffic history.
The court’s written judgment stated that under R.C. 2929.13(B) a prison term was presumed given Wheeler’s record.
Wheeler appealed, arguing the sentence was contrary to law because R.C. 2929.13(B) does not apply to third‑degree felonies nor does it create a presumption of imprisonment.
The State conceded the citation was erroneous and characterized it as a clerical/scrivener error; it urged either a ministerial modification or a nunc pro tunc correction rather than resentencing.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court erred by imposing sentence under the belief that R.C. 2929.13(B) presumes a prison term	The State conceded the citation was erroneous but argued it was clerical and should be corrected (modify entry or nunc pro tunc)	Wheeler argued the sentence is contrary to law because R.C. 2929.13(B) does not apply to third‑degree felonies and does not create a presumption of imprisonment	The court found the reference to a presumption was legal error; because the record did not conclusively show the error was purely clerical, the sentence was vacated and the case remanded for resentencing

State v. Miller, 940 N.E.2d 924 (2010) (a trial court speaks through its journal; limits on use of nunc pro tunc to correct clerical errors)
State ex rel. Cruzado v. Zaleski, 856 N.E.2d 263 (2006) (definition of clerical/machine error and limits on nunc pro tunc relief)