State v. Snelling

2013 Ohio 2633

• Court: Ohio Court of Appeals
• Decided: June 21, 2013
• Docket: 12CA79
• Status: Published

Opinion

[Cite as State v. Snelling, 2013-Ohio-2633.]

COURT OF APPEALS RICHLAND COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

STATE OF OHIO JUDGES: Hon. William B. Hoffman, P.J. Plaintiff-Appellee Hon. Patricia A. Delaney, J. Hon. Craig R. Baldwin, J. -vs- Case No. 12CA79 REGINALD SNELLING

Defendant-Appellant OPINION

CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: Appeal from the Richland County Court of Common Pleas, Case No. 10-CR-43 D

JUDGMENT: Affirmed

DATE OF JUDGMENT ENTRY: June 21, 2013

APPEARANCES:

For Plaintiff-Appellee For Defendant-Appellant

JAMES J. MAYER, JR. JAMES L. BLUNT, II PROSECUTING ATTORNEY 445 West Longview Avenue RICHLAND COUNTY, OHIO Mansfield, Ohio 44903

BY: JILL M. COCHRAN Assistant Richland County Prosecutor 38 South Park Street Mansfield, Ohio 44902 Richland County, Case No. 12CA79 2

Hoffman, P.J.

{¶1} Defendant-appellant Reginald Snelling appeals his sentence entered by

the Richland County Court of Common Pleas. Plaintiff-appellee is the state of Ohio.

STATEMENT OF THE CASE1

{¶2} On June 8, 2010, Appellant was found guilty by a jury of abduction, failure

to comply with an order or signal of a police officer and assault on a police officer. Via

Sentencing Entry of June 15, 2010, Appellant was sentenced to seven years in prison

and a mandatory three year term of post-release control.

{¶3} On June 14, 2010, Appellant filed a direct appeal from his conviction with

this Court in State v. Snelling, Fifth Dist. Case No. 10-CA-94. This Court affirmed

Appellant’s conviction via Judgment Entry of June 22, 2011. See, State v. Snelling, 5th

Dist. No. 10-CA-94, 2011-Ohio-3222.

{¶4} On October 11, 2011, Appellant filed a pro se motion to vacate his

sentence and for appointment of counsel. Via Judgment Entry of December 8, 2011,

the trial court overruled Appellant’s motion.

{¶5} On April 9, 2012, Appellant filed a pro se motion for sentencing. His

motion was denied via Judgment Entry filed August 9, 2012.

{¶6} It is from that entry, Appellant prosecutes this appeal, assigning as error:

{¶7} “I. THE TRIAL COURT ERRED BY FAILING TO ORALLY PRONOUNCE

NOTIFICATION OF THE IMPOSITION OF POST RELEASE CONTROL AND THE

1 A rendition of the underlying facts is unnecessary for our resolution of the within appeal. Richland County, Case No. 12CA79 3

CONSEQUENCES OF A VIOLATION OF POST RELEASE CONTROL; THEREBY

RENDERING THE SENTENCING VOID.”

{¶8} In the sole assigned error, Appellant maintains the trial court erred during

his sentencing in failing to orally pronounce the time period of post-release control and

the consequences of violation as statutorily mandated by R.C. 2943.032. Appellant

maintains his sentence is therefore void.

{¶9} R.C. 2943.032 reads,

{¶10} “Prior to accepting a guilty plea or a plea of no contest to an indictment,

information, or complaint that charges a felony, the court shall inform the defendant

personally that, if the defendant pleads guilty or no contest to the felony so charged or

any other felony, if the court imposes a prison term upon the defendant for the felony,

and if the offender violates the conditions of a post-release control sanction imposed by

the parole board upon the completion of the stated prison term, the parole board may

impose upon the offender a residential sanction that includes a new prison term of up to

nine months.”

{¶11} The statute pertains to the trial court’s acceptance of a guilty plea or of a

plea of no contest. As set forth in the Statement of the Case, supra, Appellant was

convicted of the charges following a jury trial. Therefore, Appellant’s reliance on R.C.

2943.032 is misplaced. For the same result see, State v. Reid, 2nd Dist. No. 24841,

2012-Ohio-2666 and State v. Panza, 8th Dist. No. 841777, 2005-Ohio-94.

{¶12} The sole assignment of error is overruled. Richland County, Case No. 12CA79 4

{¶13} Appellant’s sentence in the Richland County Court of Common Pleas is

affirmed.

By: Hoffman, P.J.

Delaney, J. and

Baldwin, J. concur

s/ William B. Hoffman _________________ HON. WILLIAM B. HOFFMAN

s/ Patricia A. Delaney _________________ HON. PATRICIA A. DELANEY

s/ Craig R. Baldwin ___________________ HON. CRAIG R. BALDWIN Richland County, Case No. 12CA79 5

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR RICHLAND COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

STATE OF OHIO : : Plaintiff-Appellee : : -vs- : JUDGMENT ENTRY : REGINALD SNELLING : : Defendant-Appellant : Case No. 12CA79

For the reason stated in our accompanying Opinion, Appellant’s sentence in the

Richland County Court of Common Pleas is affirmed. Costs to Appellant.

s/ William B. Hoffman _________________ HON. WILLIAM B. HOFFMAN

s/ Patricia A. Delaney _________________ HON. PATRICIA A. DELANEY

s/ Craig R. Baldwin ___________________ HON. CRAIG R. BALDWIN