Court of Appeals of Ohio, Sixth District, Sandusky
Court No. 18 CR 636
Timothy Braun, Sandusky County Prosecuting Attorney, and
Joseph H. Gerber, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for
L. Coble, for appellant.
DECISION AND JUDGMENT
1} In this accelerated appeal, defendant-appellant,
Houston Stubbs, appeals the November 29, 2018 judgment of the
Sandusky County Court of Common Pleas convicting him of three
drug trafficking offenses and sentencing him to consecutive
terms of imprisonment for an aggregate term of 48 months with
costs. For the following reasons we affirm in part and
reverse in part.
Facts and Procedural Background
2} On June 18, 2018, Houston Stubbs was indicted for
three offenses related to trafficking in cocaine: (1) a
violation of R.C. 2925.03(A)(1) and (C)(4)(a), a felony of
the fifth degree, (2) a violation of R.C. 2925.03(A)(1) and
(C)(4)(c), a felony of the fourth degree, and (3) a violation
of R.C. 2925.03(A)(1) and (C)(4)(d), a felony of the third
degree. The charges were the result of three separate
transactions whereupon Stubbs sold increasing amounts of
cocaine to confidential informants between August 23, 2016,
and February 23, 2017.
3} On October 2, 2018, Stubbs entered a plea of
guilty to all counts of the indictment with an agreement that
there would be a presentence investigation. On November 28,
2018, subsequent to a presentence investigation report, the
trial court sentenced Stubbs to 12 months imprisonment on
Count 1, 12 months imprisonment on Count 2, and 36 months
imprisonment on Count 3. The court ordered that Counts 1 and
2 be served concurrently to each other, and that together
they be served consecutively to Count 3. The result was a
sentence totaling 48 months in prison as well as an order to
pay the costs of prosecution and the cost of his appointed
counsel, all of which was journalized in a sentencing entry
on November 29, 2018.
B. Assignments of Error
4} On appeal Stubbs puts forth two assignments of
Assignment of Error One: The trial court erred in imposing a
consecutive sentence without making statutorily required
findings either at the sentencing hearing or in the judgment
entry. Also, even if such findings were made, the findings
are not supported by the record.
Assignment of Error Two: The trial court failed to impose
costs at the sentencing hearing in violation of Crim.R. 43
and failed to find appellant had the ability to pay costs,
rending [sic] the imposition of costs invalid.
5} We will consider each of these ...