FROM JUDGMENT ENTERED IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS COUNTY OF
LORAIN, OHIO CASE No. 15CR092937
D. TOTH, Attorney at Law, for Appellant.
P. WILL, Prosecuting Attorney, and BRIAN P. MURPHY, Assistant
Prosecuting Attorney, for Appellee.
DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY
J. CARR JUDGE.
Appellant, Larry Knox, appeals the judgment of the Lorain
County Court of Common Pleas. This Court affirms.
In 1999, Knox was convicted of sexual imposition and gross
sexual imposition in the Lorain County Court of Common Pleas.
At that time, he was classified as a sexual predator. Though
Knox was reclassified under the Adam Walsh Act, the trial
court ultimately reinstated Knox's classification as a
sexual predator under Megan's Law pursuant to State
v. Bodyke, 126 Ohio St.3d 266, 2010-Ohio-2424. Knox was
subsequently charged with failure to verify his address in
Cuyahoga County. On October 1, 2015, the trial court granted
a motion to dismiss on the basis that Knox had not been
properly notified of his duties to register at the time his
sexual predator classification was reinstated. The trial
court notified Knox of his duties to register at that time.
On January 22, 2016, the Lorain County Grand Jury indicted
Knox on one count of failure to register as a sexually
oriented offender. Knox invoked his right to
self-representation and the matter proceeded to a bench
trial. Knox was found guilty of the sole charge in the
indictment. The trial court sentenced Knox to a 24-month term
On appeal, Knox raises two assignments of error.
ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR I
THE FAILURE OF THE TRIAL COURT TO RAISE "SUA
SPONTE" THE ISSUE OF THE DEFENDANT'S COMPETENCY WAS
AN ABUSE OF DISCRETION. THIS FAILURE LED TO A VIOLATION OF
KNOX'S DUE PROCESS RIGHTS.
In his first assignment of error, Knox contends that the
trial court abused its discretion by failing to sua sponte
raise the issue of his competency to stand trial. This Court
When an appellant argues that the trial court should have sua
sponte raised the issue of competency based, at least in
part, on events that transpired during trial, the trial
court's decision as to whether to hold a competency
hearing is reviewed for an abuse of discretion. State v.
Rahman, 23 Ohio St.3d 146, 156 (1986). An abuse of
discretion indicates that the trial court's ...