474 N.E.2d 685 | Ohio Ct. App. | 1984
Effective March 16, 1983, the Ohio General Assembly amended the provisions of R.C.
Defendant, Gary R. Smith, was charged with recklessly causing the death of another on October 4, 1982, while defendant was operating a vehicle, in violation of R.C.
Prior to March 16, 1983, R.C.
"The trial judge of any court of *115 record shall, in addition to, or independent of all other penalties provided by law or by ordinance, suspend for not lessthan thirty days nor more than three years or revoke the license of any person who is convicted of or pleads guilty to any of the following:
"(A) Homicide by vehicle;
"(B) Operating a motor vehicle while under the influence ofalcohol or any drug of abuse;
"(C) Perjury or the making of a false affidavit under sections
"(D) Any crime punishable as a felony under the motor vehiclelaws of this state or any other felony in the commission of whicha motor vehicle is used;" (Emphasis added.)
After March 16, 1983, R.C.
"(A) The trial judge of any court of record, in addition to or independent of all other penalties provided by law or by ordinance, shall suspend for not less than thirty days nor morethan three years or revoke the operator's or chauffeur's license or permit or nonresident driving privileges of any person who is convicted of or pleads guilty to any of the following:
"* * *
"(2) Any crime punishable as a felony under the motor vehicle laws of this state or any other felony in the commission of which a motor vehicle is used;
"* * *
"(7) A violation of section
"* * *
"(B) Except as otherwise provided in this section, the trial judge of any court of record, in addition to or independent of all other penalties provided by law or by ordinance, shall revokethe operator's or chauffeur's license or permit or nonresident operating privilege of any person who is convicted of or pleadsguilty to a violation of section
"(C) The trial judge of any court of record, in addition to or independent of all other penalties provided by law or by ordinance, shall permanently revoke the operator's or chauffeur's license or permit or nonresident operating privileges of any person who is convicted of a violation of section
For purposes of simplicity, we shall refer to the foregoing as the 1983 amendment.
R.C.
Relying on the words chosen by the legislature and the design of the 1983 amendment, we hold that while R.C.
The imposition of the mandatory revocation was error, for two reasons. First, the application of the 1983 amendment to this defendant violated the Ex Post Facto Clause of Section 10, Article
The second reason the court erred is that the proper construction of the 1983 *117
amendment is that it is prospective in operation and does not affect penalties incurred prior thereto. R.C.
The single assignment of error has merit. We reverse those parts of the judgment below that imposed the sentence on defendant and then suspended it on certain conditions, without disturbing the finding of guilt of violation of R.C.
Judgment reversed in part and cause remanded.
SHANNON, P.J., and DOAN, J., concur.
The court's intent to impose the mandatory revocation of driver's license required under R.C.
"No State shall * * * pass any * * * ex post facto law * * *."
"The general assembly shall have no power to pass retroactive laws * * *."
It is clear beyond cavil that this prohibits ex post facto laws, which are defined as those criminal statutes that make punishable what was innocent at the time committed, or make a crime more serious than it was when committed, or inflict a punishment greater than when committed, or eliminate a defense available when committed.
"A statute is presumed to be prospective in its operation unless expressly made retrospective."
"The reenactment, amendment, or repeal of a statute does not, * * *:
"* * *
"(3) Affect any violation thereof or penalty, forfeiture, or punishment incurred in respect thereto, prior to the amendment or repeal;"