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. Mayer

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Seventh District, Mahoning

June 26, 2019

STATE OF OHIO, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
RICKY D. MAYER, Defendant-Appellant.

          Criminal Appeal from the Court of Common Pleas of Mahoning County, Ohio Case No. 96 CR 207

          Atty. Paul J. Gains, Mahoning County Prosecutor and Atty. Ralph M. Rivera, for Plaintiff-Appellee

          Ricky D. Mayer, Pro se, for Defendant-Appellant.

          BEFORE: Cheryl L. Waite, Gene Donofrio, Carol Ann Robb, Judges.

          OPINION AND JUDGMENT ENTRY

          WAITE, P.J.

         {¶1} Appellant Ricky Mayer appeals the May 30, 2018, decision of the Mahoning County Common Pleas Court denying his motion for resentencing. In this motion he argued that his sentence was void because his aggravated robbery and kidnapping charges were allied offenses of similar import which should have been merged at sentencing. Based on the record here, Appellant's arguments are without merit and the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

         Factual and Procedural History

         {¶2} In November of 1995, Marcie Reagan ("Reagan"), the victim in this matter, was introduced to Appellant. Reagan has a mental disability and lived alone. The two developed a close relationship and Reagan allowed Appellant to stay in her home for four days around the time of the incident. On November 8, 1995, Reagan and Appellant got into an argument when Reagan alleged Appellant had stolen money from her home. The following day, Reagan went to work with her brother at his restaurant. Her brother brought her home later that evening. When she entered the house, Appellant was waiting. He forced her into the bedroom, where he tied her up with cat leashes and nylons and forced a sock in her mouth. Appellant also put a blanket over her head.

         {¶3} The following day, November 10, 1995, Reagan's brother arrived to take her work. When he discovered Reagan was not waiting for him to arrive as usual, he exited his car and heard her muffled cries coming from inside the house. He entered the home and found his sister lying on the floor with her ankles and hands bound and a rope around her neck. After freeing his sister he searched the house and discovered a number of items, including a VCR, jewelry, and money, were missing.

         {¶4} Appellant was subsequently arrested and charged with kidnapping and two counts of aggravated robbery. The matter proceeded to a jury trial on one count of aggravated robbery and one count of kidnapping. Appellant was found guilty of those charges and subsequently pleaded guilty to a second count of aggravated robbery which he had perpetrated against a second victim, unrelated to the instant case. The trial court sentenced Appellant to an indefinite term of not less than ten nor more than twenty-five years on the kidnapping charge; an indefinite prison term of not less than ten nor more than twenty-five years on the first count of aggravated robbery; and an indefinite prison term of not less than five nor more than twenty-five years for the second count of aggravated robbery. The court ordered the sentences to be served consecutively.

         {¶5} Appellant filed a timely direct appeal alleging the trial court erred in permitting the state to mention his prior convictions during cross-examination and that the evidence against him was insufficient to convict. We affirmed the judgment of the trial court in State v. Mayer, 7th Dist. Mahoning No. 96 C.A. 119, 2000 WL 179039 (Feb. 8, 2000).

         {¶6} On January 16, 2018, nearly twenty-two years after sentencing, Appellant filed a "Motion to Correct a Void Sentence Contrary to Law," urging that his sentence was void. Appellant claims the aggravated robbery and kidnapping convictions are allied offenses of similar import and should have been merged for sentencing. The state filed a motion in opposition, arguing that this Court affirmed Appellant's convictions, rendering the claims in the motion moot. On May 30, 2018, the trial court overruled Appellant's motion, stating only that it was moot. Appellant filed this timely appeal from that judgment entry.

         ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR NO. 1

         APPELLANTS SENTENCE WAS CONTRARY TO LAW AND THUS VOID IN VIOLATION OF R.C. 2941.25, DOUBLE JEOPARDY AND DUE PROCESS OF LAW. THE TRIAL JUDGE ABUSED HIS DISCRETION AND COMITTED [SIC] PLAIN ERROR BY SENTENCING MR. MAYER TO CONSECUTIVE ...


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.