506 N.E.2d 1187 | Ohio Ct. App. | 1986
Defendant-appellant, Janice Jones, challenges the trial court's denial of her motion to modify her sentence on an aggravated assault charge to a definite term of imprisonment. Defendant's delayed appeal raises two assignments of error,1 neither of which is well-taken.
This case arose after a multiple stabbing allegedly perpetrated by defendant Jones and James W. Pewitt on July 14, 1982. They were both indicted for felonious assault. (R.C.
On August 1, 1983, the trial court sentenced Jones under the law in effect at the time the offense was committed, imposing an indefinite term of one to five years. On November 14, 1983, defendant filed a motion for modification and correction of sentence, on the ground that she was entitled to a definite sentence under the statute in effect at the time of sentencing. In a journal entry dated December 22, 1983, the court overruled this motion, and concluded that Jones was ineligible for a definite sentence since aggravated assault includes the element of physical harm.
In her first assignment of error, defendant takes exception to the judge's ruling in this regard and argues that the trial court failed to comply with the sentencing procedures required by R.C.
"* * * Persons convicted or sentenced on or after July 1, 1983, for an offense that is a felony of the third or fourth degree and that was committed on or after January 1, 1974, and before July 1, 1983, shall be notified by the court sufficiently in advance of sentencing *86 that they may choose to be sentenced pursuant to either the law in effect at the time of the commission of the offense or the law in effect at the time of sentencing. * * *"
In the instant case, the offense was committed on July 14, 1982, and defendant was sentenced on August 1, 1983. Thus, defendant correctly asserts that she theoretically fell within the purview of R.C.
However, at the time of sentencing, R.C.
This court has interpreted the amended version of R.C.
Defense counsel relies upon State v. Ragland (1984),
In the instant case, the court amended the indictment from felonious assault to aggravated assault. Defendant pleaded guilty to this lesser included offense. It is undisputed that this lesser offense includes the element of physical harm or threat of physical harm with a deadly weapon. A guilty plea is a complete admission of a defendant's guilt. Crim. R. 11(B). Therefore, regardless of the choice afforded by R.C.
Defendant's first assignment of error is not well-taken.
In her second assignment of error, defendant argues that she was afforded different treatment than that accorded co-defendant Pewitt, in violation of her constitutional rights. Both Jones and Pewitt were indicted for felonious assault, pleaded guilty to the lesser offense of aggravated assault, and received sentences of an indefinite term of one to five years. However, the court modified Pewitt's sentence to a definite one year of minimum confinement. It is Jones' position that she is entitled to a definite sentence since Pewitt received one and that, accordingly, the trial court erroneously denied her motion to modify her sentence.
As we have noted in our discussion of the first assignment of error, defendant was not entitled to a definite sentence pursuant to R.C.
Accordingly, defendant's second assignment of error is without merit, and the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
PATTON and CORRIGAN, JJ., concur.