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. Scott

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Second District, Montgomery

June 2, 2017

STATE OF OHIO Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
DONALD F. SCOTT Defendant-Appellant

         Criminal Appeal from Common Pleas Court Trial Court Case No. 2014-CR-1862

          MATHIAS H. HECK, JR., by ALICE B. PETERS, Attorney for Plaintiff-Appellee.

          JAY A. ADAMS, Atty. Attorney for Defendant-Appellant.

          OPINION

          WELBAUM, J.

         {¶ 1} This matter is before the court on the appeal of Defendant-Appellant, Donald F. Scott, from the trial court's order revoking community control and sentencing Scott to three years in prison. In support of his appeal, Appellant contends that the trial court violated his right to due process by failing to make a written statement as to the evidence relied upon and the reasons for revoking community control. We conclude that the trial court's oral statement of its reasons at the revocation hearing, Scott's admission that he violated his community control sanctions, and the written transcription of the hearing satisfy due process. Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court will be affirmed.

         I. Facts and Course of Proceedings

         {¶ 2} On June 18, 2014, the Montgomery County Grand Jury indicted Scott on four counts of felonious assault with a deadly weapon, felonies in the second degree, in violation of R.C. 2903.11(A)(2). Dkt. 5. On September 2, 2014, Scott pled no contest to two counts of felonious assault with a deadly weapon and the State dismissed the remaining two counts. Dkt. 62. On November 18, 2014, the trial court found Scott guilty on both counts and sentenced him to community control sanctions for a period not to exceed five years. Dkt. 85. The termination entry stated that the trial court could impose prison terms of eight years for each count if Scott failed to comply with the terms of his community control or if he violated the law.

         {¶ 3} On December 2, 2015, a notice of community control revocation was filed against Scott, and on January 28, 2016, an amended notice of community control revocation was filed. Dkt. 89, 97. On February 11, 2016, the trial court continued Scott on community control sanctions for up to five years subject to the previous sanctions. The trial court modified the sanctions by adding the following: (1) Scott must serve 90 days in the Montgomery County Jail; (2) Scott must appear for a status hearing on April 4, 2016, and (3) Scott must complete 140 hours of community service. Dkt. 102.

         {¶ 4} On July 14, 2016, another notice of community control revocation was filed against Scott. Dkt. 112. The notice alleged that Scott (1) violated Rule 1 of his community control sanctions when he was charged with possession of drug paraphernalia and driving under suspension in Miamisburg Municipal Court and with petty theft and falsification in Moraine Mayor's Court; (2) violated Rule 5 of his community control by failing to report to the trial court for a status hearing; and (3) violated Special Sanctions 5 and 7 by failing to make child support payments and failing to verify the completion of community service.

         {¶ 5} On July 25, 2016, the trial court held a hearing for a first reading of Scott's community control revocation. At that hearing, Scott acknowledged receipt of the notice of revocation, waived the probable cause hearing, waived the reading of the notice of revocation, and entered a general denial of the alleged violation. Transcript, p. 4. The trial court then set the matter for an evidentiary hearing for October 7, 2016.

         {¶ 6} On October 7, 2016, the trial court was informed that Scott would be admitting to certain violations of his community control sanctions. Id. at 8-9. At the hearing, Scott admitted to the violation of Rule 5 as set forth in the notice of revocation. Id. at 9-12. He admitted to not appearing before the trial court for his status hearing and not reporting to his probation officer. Scott also admitted to violating Rule 1, but stated that the notice of revocation was not completely accurate because he was not found guilty of all of the charges in the notice. Id. Scott's counsel discussed the rule violations and mitigating factors and Scott addressed the trial court about mitigating factors. Id.

         {¶ 7} After hearing from Scott and his counsel, the trial court stated, in part (id. at 13):

It should be noted that the Court previously dealt with a revocation issue in this matter and I reinstated Mr. Scott to community control sanctions with what I will ...

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.