Court No. CRB 1801217A
J. VanEerten, Ottawa County Prosecuting Attorney, and Blake
W. Skilliter, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.
C. Whitcomb, III, for appellant.
DECISION AND JUDGMENT
1} This is an appeal from an October 26, 2018
judgment of the Ottawa County Municipal Court, sentencing
appellant to a 180-day jail term following appellant's
conviction on one count of domestic violence, in violation of
R.C. 2919.25, a misdemeanor of the first degree. For the
reasons set forth below, this court affirms the judgment of
the trial court.
2} Appellant, Nicholas Dahms, sets forth the
following assignment of error:
I. THE TRIAL COURT ABUSED ITS DISCRETION IN IMPOSING A
MAXIMUM SENTENCE UPON DEFENDANT-APPELLANT AS IT WAS AGAINST
THE MANIFEST WEIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE.
3} The following undisputed facts are relevant to
this appeal. On September 30, 2018, officers from the Port
Clinton Police Department were dispatched to an apartment
complex in connection to reports of a woman being assaulted,
screaming for help, and asking for someone to contact the
4} Upon arrival at the scene, police discovered the
victim, with whom appellant has a son who was three-weeks old
at the time of these events. The responding officers observed
multiple scratches and red marks upon her body indicative of
having just been physically assaulted. In the interim,
appellant had jumped a fence and fled the scene prior to the
arrival of the police.
5} In response to this incident, the officers
conducted an investigation, including multiple witness
interviews. The investigating officers learned that in the
course of a verbal dispute, appellant physically restrained
the victim, then repeatedly struck and choked the victim. The
victim had been holding their infant son when this incident
commenced. Fortunately, the child was not injured.
6} As a result of this incident, appellant was
charged with one count of domestic violence, in violation of
R.C. 2919.25, a misdemeanor of the first degree. On October
10, 2018, appellant pled no contest. A presentence
investigation report was ordered. On October 26, 2018, the
case proceeded to sentencing.
7} At sentencing, the trial court noted that
appellant was on parole for a prior felony arson conviction
at the time of this incident. The trial court further noted
that appellant's criminal history included arson,
tampering with evidence, theft, and driving under the
influence. Appellant failed to participate in recommended
services in connection to past offenses. Appellant failed to
pay the court ordered restitution arising in the prior theft
conviction. Appellant acknowledged that a parole violation
was pending against him due to the instant case.
8} The trial court sentenced appellant to a period
of 180 days in jail, with credit for time served. The record
reflects that appellant became aggressive and confrontational
towards the trial court upon the announcement of the
sentence. The record reflects the trial court attempted to
diffuse appellant's adversarial outburst.
9} Upon announcement of the sentence, appellant
retorted, "What? Six months?" The trial court
replied, "Easy. Take it easy." The trial court
proceeded to advise, "You are going to want to hold it.
Okay. I respect the fact that you don't agree ...