State v. Maruna, Unpublished Decision (3-12-2003)
This text of State v. Maruna, Unpublished Decision (3-12-2003) (State v. Maruna, Unpublished Decision (3-12-2003)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law.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.
Opinions
This cause was heard upon the record in the trial court. Each error assigned has been reviewed and the following disposition is made: {¶ 1} Appellant, Keith Maruna, appeals the decision of the Summit County Court of Common Pleas, which sentenced him to a prison term of seven years. This Court affirms in part, reverses in part, and remands.
{¶ 3} Appellant timely appealed, setting forth two assignments of error for review.
{¶ 5} The trial court is required to comply with R.C.
{¶ 6} "[I]f the court imposing a sentence upon an offender for a felony elects or is required to impose a prison term on the offender and if the offender previously has not served a prison term, the court shall impose the shortest prison term authorized for the offense pursuant to [
{¶ 7} The Supreme Court of Ohio has interpreted R.C.
{¶ 8} In the case sub judice, the trial court properly stated its findings pursuant to R.C.
{¶ 9} "(6) anything less would demean the seriousness of the offense[.]"
{¶ 10} Accordingly, this Court finds that the trial court complied with R.C.
{¶ 12} The trial court sentenced appellant to the maximum term for the crimes of arson and unlawful possession of dangerous ordinance. When a trial court imposes a maximum sentence, it must make findings of fact pursuant to R.C.
{¶ 13} After careful review of the sentencing hearing transcript and the judgment entry, this Court determines that the trial court has not set forth the requisite findings for imposition of a maximum term. To impose the maximum sentence, the trial court is required to find on the record one of the following: that appellant committed the worst form of the offense, or he is an offender posing the most likelihood of committing future crimes, or he falls within one of the two special categories of certain major drug offenders or repeat violent offenders. Because the trial court has not done so, appellant's second assignment of error is sustained to the extent that a maximum sentence without these findings is improper.
{¶ 14} Pursuant to R.C.
SLABY, P.J. CONCURS.
"[T]he court imposing a sentence upon an offender for a felony may impose the longest prison term authorized for the offense pursuant to [R.C.
2929.14 (A)] only upon offenders who committed the worst forms of the offense, upon offenders who pose the greatest likelihood of committing future crimes, upon certain major drug offenders, * * * and upon certain repeat violent offenders[.]"
"The court shall impose a sentence and shall make a finding that gives its reasons for selecting the sentence imposed in any of the following circumstances:
"* * *
"(d) If the sentence is for one offense and it imposes a prison term for the offense that is the maximum prison term allowed for that offense by [R.C.
2929.14 (A)], its reasons for imposing the maximum prison term[.]"
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
State v. Maruna, Unpublished Decision (3-12-2003), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-maruna-unpublished-decision-3-12-2003-ohioctapp-2003.