State v. Newman

100 Ohio St. 3d 24 | Ohio | 2003

Lead Opinion

{¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals is reversed, and the cause is remanded to the trial court for resentencing on the authority of State v. Comer, 99 Ohio St.3d 463, 2003-Ohio-4165, 793 N.E.2d 473.

Moyer, C.J., Resnick, F.E. Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., concur. O’Connor, J., concurs separately. Lundberg Stratton, J., dissents. O’Donnell, J., not participating.

---

Concurrence Opinion

O’Connor, J.,

concurring.

{¶ 2} Although I dissented in State v. Comer, 99 Ohio St.3d 463, 2003-Ohio-4165, 793 N.E.2d 473, I recognize that Comer is now the law. As such, the sentencing procedure for ordering a consecutive sentence should be the same as for ordering a maximum sentence. Thus, I concur here.

---

Dissenting Opinion

Lundberg Stratton, J.,

dissenting.

{¶ 3} For the reasons expressed in Judge Grady’s dissent in State v. Comer, 99 Ohio St.3d 463, 2003-Ohio-4165, 793 N.E.2d 473,I respectfully dissent.