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. Nance

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eighth District, Cuyahoga

March 2, 2017

STATE OF OHIO PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE
v.
KEVIN M. NANCE DEFENDANT-APPELLANT

         Criminal Appeal from the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Case Nos. CR-15-593039-A and CR-15-599367-A

          ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT Robert L. Tobik Cuyahoga County Public Defender BY: Paul Kuzmins Assistant Public Defender

          ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE Michael C. O'Malley Cuyahoga County Prosecutor BY: Glen Ramdhan Assistant Prosecuting Attorney

          BEFORE: Celebrezze, J., Boyle, P.J., and Laster Mays, J.

          JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION

          FRANK D. CELEBREZZE, JR., J.

         {¶1} Defendant-appellant, Kevin Nance ("appellant"), brings this appeal challenging the trial court's imposition of consecutive sentences. Specifically, appellant argues that the trial court imposed consecutive sentences without making the required findings under R.C. 2929.14(C)(4). After a thorough review of the record and law, this court affirms.

         I. Factual and Procedural History

         {¶2} In Cuyahoga C.P. No. CR-15-593039-A, appellant pled guilty to receiving stolen property, a fourth-degree felony in violation of R.C. 2913.51(A). On August 21, 2015, the trial court sentenced appellant to six months in jail. The trial court indicated that 90 days may be suspended at a later time. During the sentencing hearing, the trial court acknowledged that appellant violated the terms of the intervention in lieu of conviction program, which he had been placed into in two additional cases, by committing the receiving stolen property offense.[1]

         {¶3} Less than one month later, appellant was arrested and charged in another case, Cuyahoga C.P. No. CR-15-599367-A. On February 9, 2016, appellant pled guilty to drug trafficking, a third-degree felony in violation of R.C. 2925.03(A)(2), with a one-year firearm specification and forfeiture specifications; possession of criminal tools, a fifth-degree felony in violation of R.C. 2923.24(A), with forfeiture specifications; and having weapons while under disability, a third-degree felony in violation of R.C. 2923.13(A)(2), with forfeiture specifications.

         {¶4} On April 12, 2016, the trial court held a sentencing hearing during which it heard from the state, appellant's counsel, appellant's father, and appellant. The trial court sentenced appellant to an aggregate three-year prison term: one year on the firearm specification to be served prior to and consecutively with two years on the underlying drug trafficking count; one year on the possession of criminal tools count; and 18 months on the having weapons while under disability count. The trial court ordered the possession of criminal tools and having weapons while under disability counts to run concurrently to the trafficking count.

         {¶5} In addition to sentencing appellant in CR-15-599367-A, the trial court addressed appellant's violations in CR-15-593039-A, CR-14-586120-A, and CR-13-577702-A. The trial court found appellant to be in violation of his probation in CR-15-593039-A. As a result, the trial court sentenced appellant to a prison term of 18 months on the receiving stolen property count. The trial court ordered appellant's 18-month sentence to run consecutively to his three-year sentence in CR-15-599367-A, for a total prison term of four and one-half years. The trial court terminated appellant's community control sanctions in CR-13-577702-A and CR-14-586120-A without further action.

         {¶6} Appellant filed the instant appeal challenging the trial court's sentences. He assigns one error for review:

I. Appellant's sentence is contrary to law because the trial court imposed a consecutive sentence without making the necessary findings.

         II. Law and Analysis

         A. Consecutive Sentences

         {¶7} In his sole assignment of error, appellant argues that the trial court failed to make the requisite findings pursuant to R.C. ...


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.