State v. Sizemore, Unpublished Decision (12-12-2005)

Ohio Court of Appeals

State v. Sizemore, Unpublished Decision (12-12-2005)

2005 Ohio 6555

CourtOhio Court of Appeals

DecidedDecember 12, 2005

DocketNo. CA2005-05-034.

StatusUnpublished

This text of 2005 Ohio 6555 (State v. Sizemore, Unpublished Decision (12-12-2005)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law.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State v. Sizemore, Unpublished Decision (12-12-2005), 2005 Ohio 6555 (Ohio Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION {¶ 1} Defendant-appellant, Melissa D. Sizemore, was indicted on two third-degree felony counts of operating a vehicle under the influence of alcohol ("OVI") and one count of driving while under suspension. In exchange for a guilty plea on one of the OVI counts, the state agreed to dismiss the remaining charges.

{¶ 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), 542 U.S. 296,124 S.Ct. 2531.

{¶ 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, 2005-Ohio-5768, ¶ 18; State v. Farley, Butler App. No. CA2004-04-085, 2005-Ohio-2367, ¶ 43; and Statev. Combs, Butler App. No. CA2005-03-047, 2005-Ohio-1923, ¶ 38.

{¶ 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

OPINION {¶ 1} Defendant-appellant, Melissa D. Sizemore, was indicted on two third-degree felony counts of operating a vehicle under the influence of alcohol ("OVI") and one count of driving while under suspension. In exchange for a guilty plea on one of the OVI counts, the state agreed to dismiss the remaining charges.

{¶ 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), 542 U.S. 296,124 S.Ct. 2531.

{¶ 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, 2005-Ohio-5768, ¶ 18; State v. Farley, Butler App. No. CA2004-04-085, 2005-Ohio-2367, ¶ 43; and Statev. Combs, Butler App. No. CA2005-03-047, 2005-Ohio-1923, ¶ 38.

{¶ 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2005 Ohio 6555, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-sizemore-unpublished-decision-12-12-2005-ohioctapp-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack