State v. GuilfordState v. Guilford
For Plaintiff-Appellee
JOHN D. FERRERO
PROSECUTING ATTORNEY
KATHLEEN O. TATARSKY
ASSISTANT PROSECUTOR
110 Central Plaza South, Suite 510
Canton, Ohio 44702-1413
For Defendant-Appellant
BARRY T. WAKSER
ASSISTANT PUBLIC DEFENDER
200 West Tuscarawas Street
Suite 200
Canton, Ohio 44702
{¶1} Appellant Larry Guilford, Jr., appeals the decision of the Stark County Court of Common Pleas denying his motion for jail time credit.
{¶2} Appellee is State of Ohio.
STATEMENT OF THE FACTS AND CASE
{¶3} On August 20, 2004, Appellant Larry Guilford, Jr. was indicted on one count of Burglary, in violation of
{¶4} On October 8, 2004, Appellant entered a plea of guilty to the indictment.
{¶5} By Judgment Entry filed October 15, 2004, the trial court sentenced Appellant to a four (4) year prison term. At that time, Appellant was given credit for 85 days of jail time.
{¶6} Appellant did not file a direct appeal of his conviction or sentence.
{¶7} On March 31, 2006, Appellant filed a motion for judicial release.
{¶8} On June 19, 2006, Appellant was granted judicial release and was placed on community control.
{¶9} On January 15, 2008, a motion was filed by Appellant‘s probation officer to revoke his judicial release based on unemployment and marijuana use.
{¶10} A revocation hearing was held on January 22, 2008, resulting in Appellant‘s community control being revoked.
{¶11} On February 7, 2008, a Notice of New Calculation of Sentence was prepared by the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction crediting him for 707 days of incarceration and determining his new release date as February 17, 2010.
{¶13} By Judgment Entry filed February 28, 2008, the trial court specifically found that Appellant was entitled to 139 days of jail time credit for time served in the Stark County Jail as follows:
{¶14} “07/22/04 to 10/14/04
{¶15} “05/19/06 to 06/13/06
{¶16} “01/10/08 to 02/07/08
{¶17} “TOTAL = 139 DAYS.”
{¶18} On March 4, 2009, Appellant filed a motion for jail time credit for time served on electronically monitored house arrest, which had been ordered as a condition of his community control.
{¶19} By Judgment Entry filed March 30, 2009, the trial court denied Appellant‘s motion.
{¶20} Appellant now appeals to this Court, assigning the following error for review:
ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR
{¶21} “I. THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN OVERRULING APPELLANT‘S MOTION FOR JAIL TIME CREDIT FOR TIME SERVED ON ELECTRONICALLY MONITORED HOUSE ARREST.”
I.
{¶22} In his sole assignment of error, Appellant claims that the trial court‘s denial of his motion for jail time credit was error. We disagree.
{¶24} In the case sub judice, Appellant originally entered a plea and was sentenced in October, 2004. Appellant entered a plea in accordance with the terms of a negotiated plea agreement and was presented by counsel.
{¶25} We find that Appellant is barred by the doctrine of res judicata from pursuing his Motion for Jail Time Credit. Appellant had an opportunity to appeal the trial
{¶26} Accordingly, Appellant‘s sole assignment of error is not well-taken and is hereby overruled.
{¶27} For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the Court of Common Pleas of Stark County, Ohio, is affirmed.
By: Wise, J.
Hoffman, P. J., and
Farmer, J., concur.
/S/ JOHN W. WISE
/S/ WILLIAM B. HOFFMAN
/S/ SHEILA G. FARMER
JUDGES
JWW/d 0210
JUDGMENT ENTRY
For the reasons stated in our accompanying Memorandum-Opinion, the judgment of the Court of Common Pleas of Stark County, Ohio, is affirmed.
Costs assessed to Appellant.
/S/ JOHN W. WISE
/S/ WILLIAM B. HOFFMAN
/S/ SHEILA G. FARMER
JUDGES