269 N.E.2d 623 | Ohio Ct. App. | 1971
This appeal is from an order of the Common Pleas Court of Delaware County, filed January 8, 1971, denying the motion of the defendant, on December 24, 1970, asking for the suspension of the sentence imposed by the court by entry of October 26, 1970.
Defendant, Donald G. Orris, entered a plea of guilty to two counts, armed robbery (covered by R. C.
Defendant, appellant herein, supports his appeal from the order denying him the benefit of R. C.
Applicable statutes are important to this discussion. Pertinent portions are quoted. R. C.
"Subject to Sections
And, R. C.
"If a hearing is granted pursuant to Section
It must be noted that R. C.
The two new sections, noted ante, must be read in parimateria. R. C.
Counsel for defendant bottoms his argument on the "court shall hear" phrase and moves too quickly from the other significant phrase, "if a hearing is granted." The latter is a part of R. C.
There may be some confusion in the two choices of *89 words but the term "hearing" more nearly reflects the meaning urged by counsel for the defendant. Hearing suggests to "give audience to," a meaning which attaches when in the law a court holds a "hearing." Commonly, the word "hear" suggests communication through the ears, but equally acceptable meanings are also common, such as "to gain knowledge of" or "to entertain the idea." (See Webster's Third New International Dictionary [1961].)
The Legislature gave the trial court broad discretion in these matters. The discretion to grant a hearing is provided in R. C.
As was true at the time of the decision in State v.Poffenbaugh (1968),
The trial court having followed applicable statutes in making its order, the defendant cannot be said to have been denied due process of law.
The order of the trial court is affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
RUTHERFORD, P. J., and PUTMAN, J., concur.
TROOP, J., of the Tenth Appellate District, sitting by designation in the Fifth Appellate District. *90