State v. MartinState v. Martin
DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY
Dated: August 26, 2009
BELFANCE, Judge.
{¶1} Appellant Thomas Martin, Jr. appeals his sentence and conviction from the Summit County Court of Common Pleas. In light of the following, we vacate Martin‘s sentence and remand to the trial court for resentencing.
I.
{¶2} On September 22, 2008, officers from the Summit County Sheriff‘s Office responded to a domestic violence call. When they arrived at the home, Martin was sitting on the couch and the home was in disarray. Martin stated that he and his live-in girlfriend had gotten into an argument. When his girlfriend subsequently entered the room, she was visibly upset, crying, and her shirt was torn. The girlfriend told the officers that she and Martin had a physical altercation. The officers observed red marks on her face and a cut in her mouth. Martin was ultimately arrested. Following a bench trial, Martin was found guilty of domestic violence and sentenced to two years in prison.
II.
{¶3} Although Martin has not raised the issue on appeal, this Court concludes that Martin‘s sentence must be vacated due to an error in the trial court‘s sentencing entry with respect to post-release control. We are required to vacate and remand for resentencing in light of the recent decision of the Supreme Court of Ohio, State v. Boswell, 121 Ohio St.3d 575, 2009-Ohio-1577, ¶12 (a court cannot ignore a sentence that is void for failure to properly include term of post-release control, the court must vacate and order resentencing); see, also, State v. Holcomb, 9th Dist. No. 24287, 2009-Ohio-3187, at ¶20.
{¶4}
{¶5} In the instant matter, Martin was convicted of one count of domestic violence, a violation of
{¶6} The Supreme Court of Ohio stated in State v. Simpkins, 117 Ohio St.3d 420, 2008-Ohio-1197, at ¶22: “Because a sentence that does not conform to statutory mandates requiring the imposition of postrelease control is a nullity and void, it must be vacated.” Thus, the error in the trial court‘s sentencing entry renders it void, as it does not conform to the statutory mandates with respect to post-release control, and we must vacate and remand for resentencing. See Simpkins at ¶22; Boswell at ¶12.
{¶7} In light of our ruling that Martin‘s sentence is void, we do not address the merits of his assignments of error. State v. Bedford, 9th Dist. No. 24431, 2009-Ohio-3972, at ¶14.
III.
{¶8} The judgment of the Summit County Court of Common Pleas is vacated and remanded for proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Judgment vacated, and cause remanded.
There were reasonable grounds for this appeal.
We order that a special mandate issue out of this Court, directing the Court of Common Pleas, County of Summit, State of Ohio, to carry this judgment into execution. A certified copy of this journal entry shall constitute the mandate, pursuant to App.R. 27.
Costs taxed to Appellee.
EVE V. BELFANCE
FOR THE COURT
MOORE, P. J.
DICKINSON, J.
CONCUR
APPEARANCES:
WESLEY A. JOHNSTON, Attorney at Law, for Appellant.
SHERRI BEVAN WALSH, Prosecuting Attorney, and RICHARD S. KASAY, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for Appellee.