State v. Sizemore, Unpublished Decision (12-12-2005)
Opinion
{¶ 2} The trial court imposed a sentence that included a four-year prison term, prompting the immediate appeal in which appellant claims, as her sole assignment of error, that the trial court erred by not imposing the shortest possible prison term.
{¶ 3} Appellant submits that because she has not previously served a prison term, the imposition of a four-year sentence violates her constitutional right to a jury trial since a jury must determine and find beyond a reasonable doubt those factors necessary to enhance a prison sentence beyond the minimum term. In support of her position, appellant relies on the Supreme Court's decision in Blakely v. Washington (2004),
{¶ 4} Appellant's assignment of error is not well-taken. This court has repeatedly refused to apply the Blakely decision to Ohio's felony sentencing scheme and has held that the imposition of more than a minimum sentence upon an individual who has not previously served a prison term does not violate the constitutional right to a jury trial. State v. Brumley, Butler App. No. CA2004-05-114,
{¶ 5} We accordingly conclude that appellant's right to a jury trial was not violated and that the trial court made the necessary determinations under Ohio's sentencing laws to impose more than the minimum sentence for a third-degree felony OVI offense.
{¶ 6} Appellant's sole assignment of error is hereby overruled.
{¶ 7} Judgment affirmed.
Walsh, P.J., and Young, J., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
2005 Ohio 6555 (State v. Sizemore, Unpublished Decision (12-12-2005)) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.