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 v. Chasteen

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Twelfth District

August 19, 2013

STATE OF OHIO, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
ADAM D. CHASTEEN, Defendant-Appellant.

OPINION

8/19/2013

CRIMINAL APPEAL FROM BUTLER COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Case No. CR2007-06-1007

Michael T. Gmoser, Butler County Prosecuting Attorney, Lina N. Alkamhawi, Government Service Centre for plaintiff-appellee

Adam D. Chasteen, defendant-appellant, pro se

M. POWELL, J.

(¶ 1} Defendant-appellant, Adam D. Chasteen, appeals a decision of the Butler County Court of Common Pleas denying his motion to vacate the imposition of postrelease control. For the reasons stated below, we reverse and vacate in part the decision of the trial court and remand for further proceedings.

(¶ 2} In an October 2007 bench trial, appellant was found guilty of kidnapping, intimidation of an attorney, victim, or witness in a criminal case, and assault. Appellant was sentenced on November 27, 2007 to five years in prison and postrelease control. During the sentencing hearing, the trial court stated, "in Count 1, the Court will impose five years of postrelease control." The trial court's sentencing entry incorrectly provides that appellant was found guilty by a jury as opposed to in a bench trial. The entry also addresses postrelease control and states:

The court has notified the defendant that postrelease control is mandatory in this case up to a maximum of five (5) years, as well as the consequences for violating conditions of postrelease control imposed by the Parole Board under Revised Code 2967.28. The defendant is ordered to serve as part of this sentence any term of postrelease control imposed by the Parole Board and any prison term for violation of that postrelease control.

(¶ 3} Appellant was released from prison in September 2012 after having completed his prison sentence and was placed on postrelease control. Thereafter, appellant moved the trial court to vacate the imposition of postrelease control because the trial court did not properly notify him of postrelease control. The trial court denied appellant's motion.

(¶ 4} Appellant now appeals, asserting three assignments of error.

(¶ 5} Assignment of Error No. 1:

(¶ 6} THE TRIAL COURT FAILED TO COMPLY WITH OHIO CRIMINAL RULE 32(C).

(¶ 7} Assignment of Error No. 2:

(¶ 8} THE TRIAL COURT FAILED TO RESENTENCE THE APPELLANT PRIOR TO HIS RELEASE ...


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.