State v. SturgillState v. Sturgill
- Reporters:
- ,
- Before:
- O'Toole
Criminal Appeal from the Ashtabula County Court of Common Pleas, Case No. Judgment: Affirmed.
Nicholas A. Iarocci, Ashtabula County Prosecutor, and Shelley M. Pratt, Assistant Prosecutor, Ashtabula County Courthouse, 25 West Jefferson Street, Jefferson, OH 44047 (For Plaintiff-Appellee).
Margaret L. Brunarski, 302 South Broadway, Geneva, OH 44041 (For Defendant-Appellant).
COLLEEN MARY O‘TOOLE, J.
{¶1} Adam Sturgill appeals from the judgment entry of the Ashtabula County Court of Common Pleas, sentencing him to 11 years imprisonment for aggravated robbery. Mr. Sturgill contends the trial court did not properly balance the seriousness and recidivism factors,
{¶2} June 29, 2014, Mrs. Gayle Gurto, aged 71, was entering a Wal-Mart in Ashtabula Township, Ohio. She walked with crutches. Just inside the entry, she was
{¶3} Mr. Sturgill admitted he committed the crime because he needed money for drugs. Mr. Sturgill was 23 at the time of the offense. His family is from Ashtabula County. His mother appears to have suffered from some mental disorder. She is a methamphetamine addict. His father evidently enjoyed beating Mr. Sturgill. His mother kicked him out of home at a young age, and he drifted into Cleveland, where he lived until he was 16, before returning to Ashtabula County. He began using methamphetamines himself at 11, and later became addicted to heroin as well. He first encountered the judicial system at 13, when he was charged with what would be assault if committed by an adult. He had several further charges brought against him as a juvenile. Once he was placed on probation, and ordered to follow the recommendations of a drug and alcohol evaluation, which he did not, ending up spending 45 days in detention. Since becoming an adult, Mr. Sturgill has been charged with and convicted for numerous misdemeanor offenses in Ashtabula County. He was on probation at the time of the instant offense. Mr. Sturgill attributes his criminal conduct to the need for money to support his drug habits. He has been hospitalized for mental disorders, evidently because he was hearing voices or becomes suicidal. Mr. Sturgill attributes his delusions to his drug use.
{¶4} By an indictment filed July 23, 2014, Mr. Sturgill was charged with aggravated robbery, a felony of the first degree in violation of
{¶5} November 24, 2014, Mr. Sturgill moved the trial court for a competency evaluation, which motion was granted. The evaluation determined he was competent to stand trial.
{¶6} March 17, 2015, Mr. Sturgill entered a written plea of guilty to aggravated robbery, and the remaining charges against him were dismissed.
{¶7} Sentencing hearing went forward May 15, 2015. By a judgment entry filed May 18, 2015, the trial court sentenced Mr. Sturgill to a maximum sentence of 11 years imprisonment. This appeal timely followed, Mr. Sturgill assigning a single error: “The trial court erred by sentencing the defendant-appellant to 11 years in prison without considering statutorily-required sentencing factors.”
{¶8} ”
{¶9} “In reviewing a felony sentence,
{¶10} “‘(2) The court hearing an appeal under division (A), (B), or (C) of this section shall review the record, including the findings underlying the sentence or modification given by the sentencing court.
{¶12} “‘(a) That the record does not support the sentencing court‘s findings under division (B) or (D) of section
{¶13} “‘(b) That the sentence is otherwise contrary to law.’
{¶14} “Although trial courts have full discretion to impose any term of imprisonment within the statutory range, they must consider the sentencing purposes in
{¶15} Mr. Sturgill contends the trial court failed to balance the seriousness and recidivism factors set forth at
{¶16} We note the trial court specifically stated in its judgment entry of sentence that it had “balanced the seriousness and recidivism factors.” We further quote the trial court‘s observations at the sentencing hearing:
{¶17} “The Court has looked at the recidivism factors. Recidivism is very likely in your case. Since turning 13, you haven‘t stopped.
{¶18} “The Court‘s looked at the seriousness factors. You have irreparably injured a 71-year old woman, and you have hurt her entire family. There was serious injury to a person.
{¶19} “The more serious factors greatly outweigh the less serious factors.”
{¶20}
{¶21} The assignment of error lacks merit.
{¶22} The judgment of the Ashtabula County Court of Common Pleas is affirmed.
DIANE V. GRENDELL, J.,
TIMOTHY P. CANNON, J.,
concur.