State v. Deleon

2018 Ohio 939
CourtOhio Court of Appeals
DecidedMarch 14, 2018
Docket28566, 28610, 26811, 28612
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 2018 Ohio 939 (State v. Deleon) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State v. Deleon, 2018 Ohio 939 (Ohio Ct. App. 2018).

Opinion

[Cite as State v. Deleon, 2018-Ohio-939.]

STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS )ss: NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF SUMMIT )

STATE OF OHIO C.A. Nos. 28566, 28641, 28611, 28612

Appellee

v. APPEAL FROM JUDGMENT ENTERED IN THE BRANDON DELEON STOW MUNICIPAL COURT COUNTY OF SUMMIT, OHIO Appellant CASE Nos. 15CRB3181, 15CRB4195, 16CRB969, 16CRB1200

DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY

Dated: March 14, 2018

SCHAFER, Presiding Judge.

{¶1} Defendant-Appellant, Brandon Deleon, appeals his convictions in the Stow

Municipal Court.

I.

{¶2} On February 18, 2016, Deleon appeared in the Stow Municipal Court with

counsel and entered a plea of guilty to possession of drugs in violation of R.C. 2925.11(C)(2)(a)

in case number 2015CRB03181. That same day, the trial court found Deleon guilty and

sentenced him to a fine of $1,000.00 with $900.00 suspended and 180 days in jail with 180 days

suspended on the condition that Deleon obey all laws for one year. Deleon did not appeal the

judgment of the Stow Municipal Court.

{¶3} Then on April 15, 2016, Deleon appeared in the Stow Municipal Court with

counsel and entered guilty pleas in three additional cases. In case number 2016CRB01200,

Deleon pleaded guilty to violating a protection order in violation of R.C. 2919.27(A)(1), a 2

misdemeanor of the first degree. In case number 2016CRB00969, Deleon pleaded guilty to

aggravated menacing in violation of R.C. 2903.21(A), a misdemeanor of the first degree and

telecommunications harassment in violation of R.C. 2917.21(B), a misdemeanor of the first

degree. Finally, in case number 2015CRB04195, Deleon pleaded guilty to a second charge of

violating a protection order in violation of R.C. 2919.27. That same day, the trial court found

Deleon guilty of the above charges and sentenced him, respectively, to (1) a fine of $1,000.00

with $950.00 suspended and 180 days in jail with 180 suspended on the condition that Deleon

complete community control for a term of eighteen months and comply with all the rules of the

community control department, obey all laws for two years, have no contact with the victims; (2)

a fine of $1,000.00 with $950.00 suspended and 180 days in jail with 180 suspended on the

condition that Deleon complete community control for a term of eighteen months and comply

with all the rules of the community control department, obey all laws for two years, and have no

contact with the victims; (3) a $1,000.00 fine with $950 suspended and 180 days in jail with 150

days suspended on the condition that Deleon complete community control for a term of eighteen

months and comply with all the rules of the community control, obey all laws for two years, and

have no contact with the victims. The unsuspended jail time was to be served forthwith; (4) a

$1,000.00 fine with $950 suspended and 180 days in jail with 180 days suspended on the

condition that Deleon complete community control for a term of eighteen months and comply

with all the rules of the community control, obey all laws for two years, and have no contact with

the victims. Deleon did not appeal the judgment of the Stow Municipal Court.

{¶4} On November 30, 2016, the trial court found that Deleon had not complied with

his alternative sentence in all four of the above cases because after being placed in the Summit

County Jail by the trial court, Deleon was transferred to the Oriana House Employment 3

Placement and was absent without leave from that facility when he made contact with the victim,

resulting in new felony charges. The trial court therefore ordered that the balance of the

suspended jail time on each of the above cases be imposed consecutively for a total of 733 days

in the Summit County Jail.

{¶5} Subsequently, the Summit County Grand Jury indicted Deleon on unrelated

felony and misdemeanor charges. On February 6, 2017, when Deleon posted bond for the

unrelated charges, the Summit County Jail improperly released Deleon despite the fact he had

not completed his sentences pursuant to the Stow Municipal Court’s November 30, 2016

sentencing order. On February 7, 2017, the trial court issued bench warrants on all four cases,

noting that Deleon had been improperly released and that he needed to return to the jail to

complete his sentences. Deleon voluntarily turned himself in on the warrants and on February 9,

2017, the trial court spoke to Deleon at the Summit County Jail via a video link. At that time the

trial court explained to Deleon that he had been improperly released and that he was to remain at

the jail until his sentences were complete. Deleon’s counsel was not present. The trial court

thereafter issued an order removing the bench warrants and ordering the balance of the

November 30, 2016 order to be imposed and completed. Attached to the February 9, 2017 order

was a copy of the November 30, 2016 sentencing order.

{¶6} Deleon appealed the November 30, 2016 order and the February 9, 2017 order on

March 8, 2017. However, in a journal entry filed April 12, 2017, this Court dismissed cases

2016CRB0969, 2015CRB4195, and 2016CRB1200 from C.A. 28566 because the cases were not

consolidated in the trial court and thus, one notice of appeal was insufficient to perfect an appeal

in all four cases. Additionally, this Court denied Deleon’s request to file a delayed appeal as to

the November 30, 2016 order because Deleon failed to comply with App.R. 5(A), which requires 4

that a motion for leave to file a delayed appeal be filed concurrently with the notice of appeal.

The magistrate further stated that Deleon was not prevented from seeking leave to file delayed

appeals in the dismissed cases.

{¶7} On April 17, 2017, Deleon filed three separate motions for delayed appeals of the

February 7, 2017 order and the February 9, 2017 order in cases 2016CRB0969, 2015CRB4195,

and 2016CRB1200. On April 12, 2017, this Court questioned its jurisdiction to consider the

appeals of the February 9, 2017 order. In response, Deleon argued that the orders were final

because they were resentencing orders. However, Deleon requested that if the orders were not

final and appealable, that this Court “amend the docketing statement with the November 30,

2016 order, pursuant to App.R. 3(F).” The State also responded, arguing that the February

orders were not final and appealable orders affecting Deleon’s substantial rights. Upon review,

this Court deferred determination of its jurisdiction over the February 7, 2017 and February 9,

2017 orders until final disposition of the appeal. However, this Court denied Deleon’s request to

amend his initial filings to include the November 30, 2016 sentencing orders, but stated that

Deleon was “not precluded from filing a new notice of appeal and motion for delayed appeal as

to each of the trial court’s November 30, 2016 orders.”

{¶8} Although Deleon filed a motion to stay execution of his sentences pending appeal,

the trial court denied the motion. To date, Deleon has failed to file a motion for delayed appeal

of the November 30, 2016 sentencing orders.

{¶9} This Court consolidated Deleon’s four separate appeals. Deleon raises three

assignments of error for our review.

II.

Assignment of Error I 5

[Deleon] was not afforded due process of law during his resentencing hearing[.]

Assignment of Error II

The trial court imposed a sentence contrary to law[.]

Assignment of Error III

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

State v. Deleon
2018 Ohio 939 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2018)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2018 Ohio 939, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-deleon-ohioctapp-2018.