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. Tyler

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Ninth District, Summit

June 28, 2019

STATE OF OHIO Appellee
v.
LEONARD B. TYLER Appellant

          APPEAL FROM JUDGMENT ENTERED IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS COUNTY OF SUMMIT, OHIO No. CR-2018-04-1368

          NEIL P. AGARWAL, Attorney at Law, for Appellant.

          SHERRI BEVAN WALSH, Prosecuting Attorney, JACQUENETTE S. CORGAN, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, and for Appellee.

          DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY

          JULIE A. SCHAFER, JUDGE.

         {¶1} Defendant-Appellant Leonard Tyler appeals his sentence in the Summit County Court of Common Pleas.

         I.

         {¶2} The Summit County Grand Jury indicted Mr. Tyler on one count of escape in violation of R.C. 2921.34(A)(3), a felony of the fourth degree. Mr. Tyler eventually entered a plea of no contest. The trial court accepted his plea and found him guilty. The trial court thereafter sentenced Mr. Tyler to six months of non-reporting community control. The court further advised Mr. Tyler that if he violated the terms of his community control sanctions, violated any law, or left the State of Ohio without permission, the court could impose a more restrictive sanction or could impose a prison term of ten months with the possibility of three years of post-release control.

         {¶3} Mr. Tyler filed this timely appeal raising one assignment of error for our review.

         II.

         Assignment of Error I

         The trial court committed reversible and plain error when it sentenced the defendant without properly giving him all the required notifications concerning post-release control.

         {¶4} In his sole assignment of error, Mr. Tyler contends that the trial court committed plain error when it failed to give him all of the required notifications concerning post-release control. We disagree.

         {¶5} Although Mr. Tyler acknowledges that he did not raise this issue in the trial court and, therefore, raises a plain error argument on appeal, we note that the Supreme Court of Ohio has held that "[a] sentence that does not include the statutorily mandated term of postrelease control is void * * * and may be reviewed at any time, on direct appeal or by collateral attack." State v. Fischer, 128 Ohio St.3d 92, 2010-Ohio-6238, paragraph one of the syllabus. Therefore, Mr. Tyler did not forfeit his right to challenge his sentence as void. See State v. Hairston, 10th Dist. Franklin Nos. 07AP-160, 07AP-161, 2007-Ohio-5928, ¶ 38.

         {¶6} Regardless, the trial court did not impose a prison sentence in this case. Rather, the trial court sentenced Mr. Tyler to six months of non-reporting ...


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.