STATE OF OHIO, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MICHAEL ALBERT GELDRICH, Defendant-Appellant.
CASE NO. CA2014-08-112
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO WARREN COUNTY
5/4/2015
[Cite as State v. Geldrich, 2015-Ohio-1706.]
S. POWELL, P.J.
CRIMINAL APPEAL FROM WARREN COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Case No. 13CR29717
Jeffrey W. Stueve, 12 West South Street, Lebanon, Ohio 45036, for defendant-appellant
O P I N I O N
S. POWELL, P.J.
{¶ 1} Defendant-appellant, Michael Albert Geldrich, appeals a decision of the Warren County Court of Common Pleas ordering him to pay $64,216.39 in restitution after he pled guilty to single counts of aggravated murder, aggravated robbery, kidnaрping and tampering with evidence. For the reasons outlined below, we reverse and remand for further proceedings.
{¶ 2} On January 6, 2014, a Warren County Grand Jury indicted Geldrich on the
On or about November 30, 2013 through Decembеr 1, 2013 at 11 Vernon Street, Franklin, Warren County, Ohio, Defendants Michael Geldrich and Adam Patrick planned to rob Victim Dione Payne of his drugs and money. They agreed that Defendant Geldrich would use Defendant Patrick‘s truck as part of the robbery. Among other uses, Defendants Geldrich and Patrick agreed that Defendant Geldrich would use Defendant Patrick‘s truck to leave Victim Payne at a different location. Because of the planning and use of his truck, Defendants Geldrich and Patrick agreed Defendant Pаtrick would receive money from the robbery.
Defendant Michael Watson agreed to participate in the robbery with Defendant Geldrich. Defendants Geldrich and Watson used their hands, feet and other objects to strike Victim Payne‘s head and body. Defendants Watson and Geldrich used their own bodies and other household items to restrain victim Payne of his liberty. Because of the physical force and restraint Defendants Geldrich and Watson placed upon Victim Payne, Defendant Geldrich was able to use an object to penetrate Victim Payne‘s anal opening. Defendants Geldrich and Watson‘s force and restraint caused Victim Payne to suffer serious physical harm. Defendants Geldrich and Watson obtained heroin capsules and money from Victim Payne as a result of inflicting this serious physical harm.
After inflicting sеrious physical harm on Victim Payne, Defendants Geldrich and Watson used Defendant Patrick‘s truck and released Victim Payne at the Atrium Medical [C]enter. Victim Payne died as a result of the injuries Defendants Geldrich and Watson inflicted upon him. Specifically, Victim Payne died as a result of blunt force trauma to his head.
While at Atrium Medical Center, Defendant Geldrich disposed of items of Victim Payne. After leaving Victim Payne at Atrium Medical Center, Defendants Geldrich and Watson cleaned and otherwise аltered evidence of the offenses at 11 Vernon Street. Defendants Geldrich and Watson returned the truck to Defendant Patrick. Defendants Geldrich and Watson gave Defendant Patrick some of the money stolen from Victim Payne.
{¶ 3} On March 24, 2014, Geldrich filed a motion to suppress, which the trial court denied. Thereafter, on May 8, 2014, Geldrich entered into a plea agreement and pled guilty
{¶ 4} On August 20, 2014, the parties reconvened for purposes of sentencing. As part of the sentencing hearing, the state requested the trial court order Geldrich to pay $64,216.39 in restitution to Payne‘s mother, Tamiko Payne, for medical costs incurred by her minor son.1 In support of this claim, the state submitted copies of several medical bills totaling $64,216.39 then due and owing. Thereafter, once the trial court ordered Geldrich to pay $64,216.39 in restitution, Geldrich objected and requested the trial court hold a hearing on the matter. The trial court, however, refused to hold a hearing, stating:
Well, I mean, you could have requested [a hearing] this morning before I sentenced him. You could have said I want a hеaring on this issue. And then they would have to do something as far as presenting this evidence. But you didn‘t, you waited until I sentenced him and then you bring this up. I think I sentenced him properly. I think I ordеred restitution based on the information that was available.
{¶ 5} Geldrich now appeals from the trial court‘s decision ordering him to pay $64,216.39 in restitution, raising one assignmеnt of error for review.
{¶ 6} THE TRIAL COURT ABUSED ITS DISCRETION IN ORDERING RESTITUTION.
{¶ 7} In his single assignment of error, Geldrich argues the trial court erred and abused its discretion by ordering him to pay $64,216.39 in restitution. In support of this claim, Geldrich rаises several challenges to the trial court‘s restitution order; most notably that the trial court erred by refusing to hold an evidentiary hearing after he objected tо the amount of restitution then imposed. In response, the state concedes that the trial court erred
{¶ 8}
{¶ 9} In this case, the record firmly establishes that Geldrich disputed the amount of restitution imposed and explicitly requested an evidentiary hearing on the matter. In turn, pursuant to the requirements found in
{¶ 10} Again, the state concedes thаt it was error and an abuse of discretion for the
{¶ 11} In reviewing this decision, we note that as part of his reply brief, Geldrich argues this matter should not be remanded tо the trial court to hold an evidentiary hearing since he “raised numerous errors that are dispositive without the necessity of a further hearing.” However, as the plаin and unambiguous language in
{¶ 12} Judgment reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
RINGLAND and HENDRICKSON, JJ., concur.