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. Murray

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Fourth District, Highland

March 31, 2017

STATE OF OHIO, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
NATHAN L. MURRAY, Defendant-Appellant.

          Timothy Young, Ohio Public Defender, and Allen Vender, Ohio Assistant Public Defender, Columbus, Ohio, for appellant.

          Anneka P. Collins, Highland County Prosecuting Attorney, Hillsboro, Ohio, for appellee.

          DECISION AND JUDGMENT ENTRY

          WILLIAM H. HARSHA, JUDGE

         {¶1} The trial court initially sentenced Nathan L. Murray to prison followed by a term of post-release control. However the court did not include notification in its sentencing entry that a violation of post-release control would result in a prison sentence to be served consecutively to any prison sentence Murray received for committing a new crime.

         {¶2} While on post-release control Murray was convicted of a new felony offense and the court sentenced him to a prison term for his post-release control violation. The court ordered that the post-release control sanction be served consecutively to the prison term for his new conviction. After he had served the prison term for his new crime, Murray filed a motion to vacate his judicial-sanction sentence, which the trial court denied.

         {¶3} On appeal Murray asserts that based on our precedent, the trial court erred in denying his motion. Nevertheless, as he concedes in his reply brief, in State v. Mozingo, 2016-Ohio-8292, ___ N.E.3d ___ (4th Dist.) we have recently overruled the cases he relies upon. Based on Mozingo, we overrule his assignment of error and affirm the judgment of the trial court.

         I. FACTS

         {¶4} In October 2010, in Case No. 10CR0048, the Highland County Court of Common Pleas sentenced Nathan L. Murray to a prison term of eight months and a mandatory five-year term of post-release control on his felony conviction for importuning. In accordance with R.C. 2929.141(A)(1) the trial court advised Murray at his sentencing hearing that if he was convicted of a new felony while under post-release control, he could be sentenced to serve an additional prison term for his violation of post-release control, and that term would be consecutive to his sentence in the new felony case. But the trial court's sentencing entry only stated that "[i]f the violation is a new felony, the defendant could receive a prison term of the greater of one year or the time remaining on post release control, in addition to any other prison term imposed for the offense." It did not provide notice that the new term would be served consecutively to his sentence for the new felony offense.

         {¶5} After completing his eight-month prison term on March 3, 2011, and while on post-release control, Murray committed a new felony offense, failure to register a change of address as a registered sex offender, thus violating the terms of his supervised release. In September 2011, in Case No. 11 CR 098, the trial court sentenced Murray to 14 months in prison for his new offense and additionally imposed a 1, 617-day judicial-sanction sentence for violating his post-release control, to be served consecutively to his 14-month sentence.

         {¶6} In May 2016, Murray filed a motion to vacate the judicial-sanction portion of his sentence. (OP37) He claimed that his October 2010 sentencing entry was defective because it did not properly advise him that his judicial-sanction sentence would be served consecutively to any prison term imposed for a new felony, in accordance with R.C. 2929.141(A)(1). Following a hearing where it stated its intent to "challenge the Fourth District, and hopefully the Supreme Court to take this on and address what I think was a result that makes no sense, " the trial court denied the motion. This appeal ensued.

         II. ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR

         {¶7} Murray assigns the following error for our review:

         THE TRIAL COURT ERRED WHEN IT DENIED MR. MURRAY'S MOTION TO VACATE HIS ...


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.