Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

State of Ohio v. Diana L. Singleton Nka Roop

September 28, 2011

STATE OF OHIO APPELLEE
v.
DIANA L. SINGLETON NKA ROOP APPELLANT



APPEAL FROM JUDGMENT ENTERED IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS COUNTY OF SUMMIT, OHIO CASE No. CR-2000-08-1934 CR-2000-11-2703 A

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Carr, Judge.

Cite as

State v. Singleton,

ss:

DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY

{¶1} Appellant, Diana Singleton, nka Diana Roop, appeals the judgment of the Summit County Court of Common Pleas. This Court affirms.

I.

{¶2} On September 1, 2000, the Summit County Grand Jury indicted Singleton on one count of illegal manufacture of drugs in violation of R.C. 2925.04(A), a felony of the second degree; one count of aggravated preparation of drugs for sale in violation of R.C. 2925.07, a felony of the fourth degree; one count of possession of drugs in violation of R.C. 2925.11(A), a felony of the fifth degree; one count of possession of drugs in violation of R.C. 2925.11(A), a misdemeanor of the third degree; one count of driving under FRA suspension in violation of R.C. 4511.192, a misdemeanor of the first degree; and one count of possession of marijuana in violation of 2925.11(A), a minor misdemeanor. These charges stemmed out of an incident which occurred on August 24, 2000 and were indicted under Case. No. CR 2000-08-1934. At her arraignment on September 6, 2000, Singleton pleaded not guilty to all charges in the indictment.

{¶3} On November 27, 2000, Singleton was indicted a second time on charges stemming out of events which occurred on November 16, 2000. In Case No. CR 2000-11-2703, the Summit County Grand Jury indicted Singleton on one count of illegal manufacture of drugs in violation of R.C. 2925.04(A), a felony of the second degree; one count of aggravated possession of drugs in violation of R.C. 2925.11(A), a felony of the third degree; one count of possessing criminal tools in violation of R.C. 2923.24, a felony of the fifth degree; and one count of having weapons under disability in violation of R.C. 2923.13(A)(3), a felony of the fifth degree. Singleton subsequently pleaded not guilty to the charges.

{¶4} On March 21, 2001, Singleton reached a plea agreement with the State in both cases. In Case No. CR 2000-08-1934, Singleton pleaded guilty to attempted illegal manufacture of drugs in violation of R.C. 2923.02/2925.04(A), a felony of the third degree. The charges of aggravated preparation of drugs for sale, possession of drugs, driving under FRA suspension, and possession of marijuana were dismissed. In Case No. CR 2000-11-2703, Singleton pleaded guilty to the amended charge of attempted illegal manufacture of drugs in violation of R.C. 2923.02/2925.04(A), a felony of the third degree, as well as the charge of possessing criminal tools in violation of R.C. 2923.24, a felony of the fifth degree. The charges of aggravated possession of drugs and having a weapon while under disability were dismissed.

{¶5} The trial court conducted a sentencing hearing in both cases on April 23, 2001. Subsequently, on April 30, 2001, the trial court issued a sentencing entry in each case. In Case No. CR 2000-08-1934, the trial court sentenced Singleton to a term of two years incarceration on the count of attempted illegal manufacture of drugs. In Case No. CR 2000-11-2703, the trial court imposed a two-year term of incarceration on the count of attempted illegal manufacture of drugs and a one-year term of incarceration on the count of possessing criminal tools. The trial court ordered the sentences in Case No. CR 2000-11-2703 to be served concurrently with each other, and also concurrently with the sentence imposed in Case. No. CR 2008-08-1934.

{¶6} The transcript of docket and journal entries indicates that Singleton filed a motion for reconsideration of the original sentence on May 3, 2001. The transcript of docket and journal entries further indicates that the State filed a memorandum in opposition on May 11, 2001. Neither filing is contained within the record. Next to each entry, the Clerk of Courts has marked, "No Image." On May 16, 2001, the trial court issued journal entries in both cases indicating that the motion for reconsideration would be taken under advisement. On July 10, 2001, the trial court issued journal entries in both cases directing the Summit County Sherriff to return Singleton for "reconsideration of sentence" on July 16, 2001. The record does not contain a transcript from the July 16, 2001 hearing. On July 24, 2001, the trial court issued journal entries in both cases indicating that a hearing had been held and that the motion for reconsideration of sentence was granted. The trial court then ordered that Singleton be sentenced to two years of community control.

{¶7} More than nine years later, on August 17, 2010, Singleton filed a motion to vacate the sentence and declare the conviction void on the basis that the trial court had not properly advised her of post-release control in her original sentence. Attached to the motion were copies of the original April 30, 2001 sentencing entries in which the trial court imposed a two-year term of incarceration. On August 19, 2010, the State filed a memorandum in opposition and argued that the sentences in the entries journalized April 30, 2001, are not the sentences that were ultimately imposed and carried out. The State argued that the sentences journalized on July 24, 2001, which ordered community control, are the valid and final sentences and, therefore, the trial court was not required to impose post-release control. Singleton filed a reply on August 30, 2010, and argued that the sentences journalized on July 24, 2001, were not valid because the reconsideration hearing was actually a judicial release hearing and not a valid sentencing hearing. On October 22, 2010, the trial court denied the motion. In so doing, the trial court articulated the following reasoning:

{ΒΆ8} "Defendant was released from incarceration by effect of the July 16, 2001 sentencing entry. Defendant completed the two years of community control. Defendant clearly accepted the two years of community control and made no objections to the decision of the Court to reconsider her sentence at that time. This Court did not grant Defendant judicial release, but instead reconsidered her sentence and upon reconsideration, sentenced her to two years of community control. Having made no ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.