2005 Ohio 1000 | Ohio Ct. App. | 2005
{¶ 3} On May 7, 2004, appellant pled guilty to one count of aggravated burglary, and the remaining counts of the indictment were dismissed. The trial court accepted appellant's guilty plea, found her guilty, and sentenced her accordingly.
{¶ 4} Appellant timely appealed, setting forth four assignments of error for review. Appellant's four assignments of error have been combined for ease of discussion.
{¶ 5} In all four assignments of error, appellant argues that the trial court failed to properly notify her of the conditions of her post-release control. The State concedes this error, and urges us to remand to the trial court only for the proper instruction to appellant regarding post-release control.
{¶ 6} In State v. Jordan,
"The reasoning in Comer and Brooks equally applies to R.C.
{¶ 7} The Jordan court went on to say:
"The court's duty to include a notice to the offender about postrelease control at the sentencing hearing is the same as any other statutorily mandated term of a sentence. And based on the reasoning in Beasley, a trial court's failure to notify an offender at the sentencing hearing about postrelease control is error.
"Accordingly, when a trial court fails to notify an offender about postrelease control at the sentencing hearing but incorporates that notice into its journal entry imposing sentence, it fails to comply with the mandatory provisions of R.C.
{¶ 8} In the present case, the trial court failed to notify appellant about post-release control at the sentencing hearing. Accordingly, this Court must vacate appellant's sentence and remand for re-sentencing due to the trial court's failure to give the requisite post-release control notification under Jordan. Appellant's four assignments of error are sustained.
Judgment reversed, and cause remanded.
The Court finds that there were reasonable grounds for this appeal.
We order that a special mandate issue out of this Court, directing the Court of Common Pleas, County of Summit, State of Ohio, to carry this judgment into execution. A certified copy of this journal entry shall constitute the mandate, pursuant to App.R. 27.
Immediately upon the filing hereof, this document shall constitute the journal entry of judgment, and it shall be file stamped by the Clerk of the Court of Appeals at which time the period for review shall begin to run. App.R. 22(E). The Clerk of the Court of Appeals is instructed to mail a notice of entry of this judgment to the parties and to make a notation of the mailing in the docket, pursuant to App.R. 30.
Costs taxed to appellee.
Exceptions.
Slaby, P.J. Whitmore, J. concur.