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. Reed

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Ninth District, Summit

June 26, 2019

STATE OF OHIO Appellee
v.
LAWRENCE W. REED Appellant

          APPEAL FROM JUDGMENT ENTERED IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS COUNTY OF SUMMIT, OHIO CASE NO. CR 07-05-1385

          LAWRENCE W. REED, PRO SE, APPELLANT.

          SHERRI BEVAN WALSH, PROSECUTING ATTORNEY, AND JACQUENETTE S. CORGAN, ASSISTANT PROSECUTING ATTORNEY, FOR APPELLEE.

          DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY

          JENNIFER HENSAL JUDGE.

         {¶1} Lawrence Reed appeals a judgment of the Summit County Court of Common Pleas that denied his motion to vacate and release from post-release control supervision. For the following reasons, this Court reverses.

         I.

         {¶2} In 2007, Mr. Reed pleaded guilty to and was convicted of multiple offenses. The trial court sentenced him to four years imprisonment. Although he completed his sentence in this case in 2011, he remained imprisoned for other offenses until March 2019.

         {¶3} In November 2018, Mr. Reed filed a motion to vacate and release from postrelease control supervision, arguing that, although the trial court had informed him that he would be subject to a period of post-release control following his release, it failed to notify him about the consequences he could face for violating post-release control. He, therefore argued that the court's imposition of post-release control was void. He also argued that, because he had already completed his four-year sentence, the court could not correct its mistake.

         {¶4} The trial court denied Mr. Reed's motion, finding that it had, in fact, informed Mr. Reed of his post-release control conditions. Mr. Reed has appealed, assigning as error that the trial court incorrectly denied his motion to vacate.

         II.

ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR
THE TRIAL COURT ERRED WHEN IT DENIED APPELLANT'S MOTION TO VACATE AND RELEASE FROM POST-RELEASE CONTROL SUPERVISION. THE SENTENCING JOURNAL DID NOT INCLUDE OR PROVIDE APPELLANT WITH STATUTORILY COMPLIANT NOTIFICATION OF POST RELEASE CONTROL SUPERVISION CONSEQUENCES, NOR DID THE TRIAL COURT ALLOCATE AUTHORITY/JURISDICTION TO THE OHIO ADULT PAROLE AUTHORITY TO ENFORCE POST-RELEASE CONTROL SANCTIONS, THUS FAILING TO COMPLY WITH SEPARATION-OF-POWERS, AND FULFILL ALL STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS OF POST-RELEASE CONTROL TO BE INCLUDED IN APPELLANT'S SENTENCING JOURNAL ENTRY.

         {¶5} Mr. Reed argues that the trial court failed to give him the proper post-release control notifications or incorporate them into its sentencing entry. He also argues that, since he has completed his sentence for the offenses in this case, the trial court does not have jurisdiction to resentence him.[1]

         {¶6} "[I]n order to comply with separation-of-powers concerns and to fulfill the requirements of the postrelease-control-sentencing statutes, * * * a trial court must provide statutorily compliant notification to a defendant regarding postrelease control at the time of sentencing." State v. Qualls, 131 Ohio St.3d 499, 2012-Ohio-1111, ¶ 18, citing R.C. 2929.19(B) and 2967.28. This includes "notifying the defendant of the details of the postrelease control and the consequences of violating postrelease control." Id. The trial court must also "incorporate into the sentencing entry the postrelease-control notice to reflect the notification that was given at the sentencing hearing[, ]" which includes incorporating the consequences of violating postrelease control. Id. at ¶ 19; State v. Singleton,124 Ohio St.3d 173, 2009-Ohio-6434, ¶ 11 ("[T]he imposed post-release control sanctions are to be included in the judgment entry journalized by the court."); State v. Grimes,151 Ohio St.3d 19, 2017-Ohio-2927, ΒΆ 1. "A sentence that does not include the statutorily mandated term of postrelease ...


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.