Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eighth District, Cuyahoga
Appeal from the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Case
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT Richard Agopian
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE Michael C. O'Malley Cuyahoga
County Prosecutor By: Gregory J. Ochocki Assistant County
BEFORE: Laster Mays, J., Kilbane, P.J., and McCormack, J.
JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION
LASTER MAYS, J.
Defendant-appellant Deandre T. Carzelle
("Carzelle") appeals his sentence and asks this
court to remand to the trial court for resentencing. We
Carzelle pleaded guilty to three counts of discharging of a
firearm on or near prohibited premises, a third-degree
felony, in violation of R.C. 2923.162(A)(3); felonious
assault (with a three-year firearm specification), a
second-degree felony, in violation of R.C. 2903.11(A)(1); and
having weapons while under disability, a third-degree felony,
in violation of R.C. 2923.13(A)(2). The trial court sentenced
Carzelle to 14 years in prison; three years on the firearm
specification, eight years on the felonious assault charge,
and three years on the discharging of a firearm charge.
On March 1, 2016, Carzelle, along with his cousin, traveled
to the scene of the crime to confront some people with whom
he had a conflict. Carzelle brought a gun with him and shot
twice across a roadway towards Dequantai Cross
("Cross"). Cross was in a barbershop at the time of
the shooting. One of the bullets hit Cross in the face.
Carzelle was subsequently arrested and charged with six
Carzelle pleaded guilty to three of the six counts. The
remaining charges were dismissed. At the time of
Carzelle's sentencing, Cross still had the bullet lodged
in his face. As a result of the shooting, Cross suffered
hearing loss, has weekly therapy sessions, and faced
The trial court sentenced Carzelle to a total of 14 years in
prison. The trial court ordered that the sentences be served
consecutively. Defense counsel did not object or raise the
issue at sentencing regarding the allied offenses. As a
result, Carzelle filed this timely appeal arguing one
assignment of error:
trial court erred by imposing a consecutive sentence for an
Law and Analysis
In Carzelle's sole assignment of error, he contends that
the trial court erred by failing to merge allied offenses of
similiar import and imposing consecutive sentences for Count
2, discharging a firearm and Count 3, felonious assault.
Carzelle asks this ...