Court of Appeals of Ohio, Fifth District, Muskingum
from the Muskingum County Court of Common Pleas, Case No.
Plaintiff-Appellee D. MICHAEL HADDOX Prosecuting Attorney
GERALD V. ANDERSON II Assistant Prosecuting Attorney
Muskingum County, Ohio
Defendant-Appellant ERIC J. ALLEN The Law Office of Eric J.
JUDGES: Hon. John W. Wise, P.J. Hon. William B. Hoffman, J.
Hon. Craig R. Baldwin, J.
Defendant-appellant Larry L. McKee appeals his sentence
issued by the Muskingum County Court of Common Pleas.
Plaintiff-appellee is the State of Ohio.
OF THE FACTS AND CASE
On September 28, 2016, the Muskingum County Grand Jury
indicted appellant on four counts of gross sexual imposition
in violation or R.C. 2907.05(A)(4), felonies of the third
degree, and one count of compelling prostitution in violation
of R. C. 2907.21(A)(3)(a), also a felony of the third degree.
At his arraignment on October 5, 2016, appellant entered a
plea of not guilty to the charges.
Thereafter, on November 9, 2016, appellant withdrew his
former not guilty plea and entered a plea of guilty to all
four of the charges of gross sexual imposition. The charge of
compelling prostitution was dismissed upon appellee's
motion as memorialized in an Order filed on June 20, 2017.
Pursuant to an Entry filed on June 20, 2017, appellant was
sentenced to sixty (60) months on each count of gross sexual
imposition. The trial court ordered that Counts Two and Three
be served concurrently with each other and that Counts One
and Four be served concurrently with each other, but
consecutive to Counts Two and Three for an aggregate prison
sentence of 120 months. Appellant also was classified as a
Tier II Sex Offender.
Appellant now appeals, raising the following assignment of
error on appeal:
I. THE TRIAL COURT RECORD DOES NOT SUPPORT BY CLEAR AND
CONVINCING EVIDENCE THE IMPOSITION OF CONSECUTIVE SENTENCES.
Appellant in his sole assignment of error, argues that the
record does not support the imposition of consecutive
sentences. Appellant does not argue that the trial court
failed to make the appropriate findings required by R.C.
2929.14(C). Instead, he argues that consecutive sentences are