Court of Appeals of Ohio, Twelfth District, Butler
APPEAL FROM BUTLER COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Case No.
Michael T. Gmoser, Butler County Prosecuting Attorney, Willa
Concannon, Government Services Center, for plaintiff-appellee
N. Blauvelt, for defendant-appellant
1} Defendant-appellant, Joseph I. Gladwell, appeals
from the 14-month prison sentence he received in the Butler
County Court of Common Pleas for violating the conditions of
his community control. For the reasons outlined below, we
2} On January 28, 2013, Gladwell entered into a plea
agreement and pled guilty to one count of vandalism in
violation of R.C. 2909.05(B)(1)(a), a fifth-degree felony,
and one count of grand theft in violation of R.C.
2913.02(A)(1), a fourth-degree felony. The charges arose
after Gladwell stole a Ford F250 pickup truck from the lot of
Manheim Auto Auction located in Warren County and rammed said
pickup truck into a security gate during the night of August
22, 2010 or the early morning hours of August 23, 2010.
3} As a result of his guilty plea, on May 1, 2013,
the trial court sentenced Gladwell to nine months in prison
on the vandalism charge and five years of community control
on the charge of grand theft. Gladwell was also ordered to
pay $20, 000 in restitution. It is undisputed that at his
original sentencing hearing the trial court explicitly
advised Gladwell that he faced 18 months in prison if he
violated the conditions of his community control.
4} On March 5, 2015, the trial court issued an entry
finding Gladwell violated the conditions of his community
control. However, instead of sentencing Gladwell to prison,
the trial court continued the conditions of his community
control and further required him to complete 20 hours of
community service until he found full-time employment,
complete corrective thinking classes, live in Butler County,
and pay $420 per month in restitution. Just like his original
sentencing hearing, it is undisputed that the trial court
explicitly advised Gladwell that he faced 18 months in prison
if he violated the conditions of his community control.
5} On November 18, 2015, the trial court issued
another entry finding Gladwell had again violated the
conditions of his community control. However, just like it
had done previously, instead of sentencing Gladwell to
prison, the trial court continued the conditions of
Gladwell's community control and further required
Gladwell to complete the MonDay program at the MonDay
Community Correctional Institute in Dayton, Ohio within six
months. Unlike at his original sentencing hearing and
previous community control violation hearing, the trial court
did not explicitly advise Gladwell that he faced 18 months in
prison if he violated the conditions of his community
control. Rather, the trial court advised Gladwell of the
Now this is your last shot. You're going to go to prison
next time you mess up and I will also want to add, zero
tolerance on him. So that when you get out, if you mess up,
even the littlest bit, you're going - that's my clue
that you need to go to prison.
6} On June 24, 2016, the trial court issued an entry
finding Gladwell had once again violated the conditions of
his community control. As a result, just as the trial court
advised Gladwell that it would, the trial court revoked
Gladwell's community control and sentenced him to serve
14 months in prison. Gladwell now appeals from the trial
court's decision sentencing him to 14 months in prison,
raising the following single assignment of error for review.
7} THE TRIAL COURT ERRED TO THE PREJUDICE OF
APPELLANT WHEN IMPOSING A TERM OF IMPRISONMENT FOR HIS
COMMUNITY CONTROL VIOLATION.
8} In his single assignment of error, Gladwell
argues the trial court erred by sentencing him to a 14-month
prison term for violating the conditions of his community
control since the trial court did not explicitly advise him
at his most recent community control violation hearing of the
potential 18-month prison term he faced if he violated those
conditions again. We disagree.
9} In support of his claim, Gladwell relies on the
Ohio Supreme Court's decision in State v.
Fraley,105 Ohio St.3d 13, 2004-Ohio-7110, wherein the
court held that pursuant to R.C. ...