Stаte of Ohio, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Melanie A. Ogle, Defendant-Appellant.
Case No. 16CA22
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT HOCKING COUNTY
RELEASED: 3/06/2017
[Cite as State v. Ogle, 2017-Ohio-869.]
HARSHA, A.J.,
DECISION AND JUDGMENT ENTRY
{¶1} Appellant Melanie A. Ogle appealed an order terminating a prior probation/community control order, discharging her from probation/community control, and restoring her to all civil rights unless otherwise prohibited by law. (Hоcking County Court of Common Pleas Case No. 09CR0125, Order of Court, Oct. 5, 2016) The state filed a motion to dismiss arguing that the order is not a final appealable order. Ogle opposed the motion, arguing that the order was an implicit denial of her pending postconviction relief petition. We dismiss Ogle‘s appeаl because the order appealed from is not a final appealable order. Moreover, we have previously held that Ogle has wаived her right to appeal her community control sanction. We GRANT the state‘s motion and DISMISS this appeal because the entry appealеd from is not a final, appealable order.
I. Procedural History
{¶2} In September 2011, Ogle was sentenced to three years of community control as part of her sentеnce on felony assault conviction. Later, due to damage she inflicted on an ankle monitor, the trial court found her guilty of criminal damaging and, as part of a
{¶3} We held that the two-year extension of community control was part of a plea bargain and was not subject to review under
Community control was imposed as part of Appellant‘s sentence for felony assault. It was imposed pursuant to plea negotiations which also resolved a misdemeanor charge. Community control as part of a felony sentence may not exceed five years.
R.C. 2929.15(A)(1) . Similarly, community control as part of a misdemeanor sentence may not exceеd five years.R.C. 2929.25(2) . The record reflects this was an agreed sentence and our review indicates it is not contrary to law. We agree Appellant waived her right to appeal. As such, we affirm the judgment of the trial court and overrule this assignment of error.
Id. at ¶ 104. A comprehensive procedural history of this сase and other related cases is set forth in the 2013 Ogle, supra, decision.
{¶4} More recently, in September 2016, Ogle filed a postconviction relief petition challenging thе September 2011 conviction and sentence. The state opposed the petition and, according to the court docket, the trial cоurt had not yet ruled on Ogle‘s petition when she filed this appeal.
{¶5} Also in September 2016, Ogle‘s extended community control sanction expired and the trial сourt entered an order terminating it that stated: “Considered and Ordered this 26 day of September, 2016 that the probation order entered on the 27 day of
{¶6} Ogle appealed the trial court‘s order discharging her from community control.
II. Legal Analysis
{¶7} The trial court‘s entry tеrminating community control sanctions and discharging Ogle is not a final appealable order. Appellate courts in Ohio have jurisdiction to review the final orders or judgments of inferior courts within their district.
{¶8} Community control proceedings are created by statute and set forth in
{¶9} However, not all orders arising out of community control proceedings affect a
{¶10} In State v. Ogle, 4th Dist. Hocking No. 14CA17, 2014-Ohio-4868, we held that an order denying Ogle‘s motion to terminate her community cоntrol was not a final appealable order because her motion was an attempt to correct or modify her sentence. Trial courts lack any statutory authority to terminate community control outside the statutory framework provided in
{¶11} Here, the trial court‘s order officially reсords and memorializes the expiration of Ogle‘s five-year community control term. It does not revoke community control and impose a sentenсe or otherwise affect a substantial right. Ogle has no right to have her
{¶12} The trial court‘s order did not affect a “substantial right” and therefore, it is not a final, аppealable order and we lack jurisdiction to consider this appeal.
III. Conclusion
{¶13} We conclude that the trial court‘s order terminating Ogle‘s community control and discharging her from it did not affect a substantial right and is not a final, appealable order. Because the trial court‘s order is not a final аppealable order, we do not have jurisdiction to consider an appeal from that order. Therefore, we GRANT the state‘s motion and DISMISS this аppeal.
{¶14} The clerk shall serve a copy of this order on all counsel of record at their last known addresses. The clerk shall serve appellant by certified mail, return receipt requested. If returned unserved, the clerk shall serve appellant by ordinary mail.
{¶15} MOTION TO DISMISS GRANTED. APPEAL DISMISSED. COSTS TO APPELLANT.
{¶16} IT IS SO ORDERED.
Abele, J. & Hoover, J.: Concur.
FOR THE COURT
William H. Harsha
Administrative Judge