State v. RobinsonState v. Robinson
M. POWELL, J.
{¶ 1} Defendant-appellant, Willie Robinson, appeals the sentence he received in the Warren County Court of Common Pleas after he was found guilty of theft.
{¶ 2} Appellant was indicted in March 2016 on one count of theft in violation of
{¶ 3} Appellant now appeals, raising three assignments of error.
{¶ 4} Assignment of Error No. 1:
{¶ 5} THE TRIAL COURT ERRED WHEN ORDERING THE DEFENDANT TO PAY RESTITUTION IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,228.89.
{¶ 6} Appellant argues the trial court erred in ordering him to pay $1,228.89 in restitution to the liquor store because no evidence was presented during the sentencing hearing as to the amount of restitution, and “more importantly,” the trial court never mentioned restitution during the sentencing hearing as required under
{¶ 7}
[T]he court imposing a sentence upon an offender for a felony may sentence the offender to any financial sanction or combination of financial sanctions authorized under this section[.] Financial sanctions that may be imposed pursuant to this section include * * * [r]estitution by the offender to the victim of the offender‘s crime * * * in an amount based on the victim‘s economic loss. If the court imposes restitution, the court shall order that the restitution be made to the victim in open court, to the adult probation department that serves the county on behalf of the victim, to the clerk of courts, or to another agency designated by the court.
{¶ 8} A review of the sentencing hearing transcript reveals that the trial court failed to inform appellant in open court that he was required to pay restitution, and in fact, restitution was never mentioned, yet the court imposed a restitution order of $1,229.89 in its June 8, 2016 sentencing entry. Where a trial court fails to inform a defendant in open court that he or she is required to pay restitution as required under
{¶ 9} Appellant‘s first assignment of error is sustained.
{¶ 10} Assignment of Error No. 2:
{¶ 11} THE COURT COMMITTED PLAIN ERROR WHEN IT ORDERED WILLIE ROBINSON TO PAY RESTITUTION AND IMPOSED A FINANCIAL SANCTION UNDER
{¶ 12} Appellant challenges the restitution order, arguing the trial court failed to consider his present and future ability to pay in violation of
{¶ 13} Assignment of Error No. 3:
{¶ 14} THE TRIAL COURT FAILED TO PROPERLY CONSIDER THE PRINCIPLES OF SENTENCING AND RECIDIVISM OF THE OFFENDER IN SENTENCING MR. ROBINSON TO THE MAXIMUM OF 12 MONTHS IN PRISON.
{¶ 15} Appellant argues the trial court erred in sentencing him to the maximum term of 12 months in prison. Appellant asserts his sentence is contrary to law because the trial court failed to address the seriousness and recidivism factors of
{¶ 16} This court reviews felony sentences pursuant to the standard of review set forth in
{¶ 17} After a thorough review of the record, we find no error in the trial court‘s decision to sentence appellant to the maximum 12-month prison term. As the record plainly reveals, appellant‘s sentence is not clearly and convincingly contrary to law because the trial court properly considered the principles and purposes of
{¶ 18} “The fact that the trial court did not expressly cite to
{¶ 19} The record further supports the trial court‘s sentencing decision. Given the fact that appellant has a lengthy criminal history involving 38 convictions for robbery, theft, burglary, and safecracking, 14 of which followed the same modus operandi as the case at bar, and the fact that the only time appellant, who is now 69 years old, has refrained from engaging in criminal activity was when he was incarcerated, the record supports the trial court‘s determination that the 12-month prison term is commensurate with the seriousness of appellant‘s conduct, necessary to punish appellant, and necessary to protect the public from future crime by appellant.
{¶ 20} Appellant‘s third assignment of error is overruled.
{¶ 21} Judgment affirmed in part, reversed in part solely as to the restitution order, and remanded for a hearing on the issue of restitution.
S. POWELL, P.J. and RINGLAND, J., concur.