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. Gossett

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eighth District, Cuyahoga

August 15, 2019

STATE OF OHIO, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
JOHN P. GOSSETT, Defendant-Appellant.

          Criminal Appeal from the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Case No. CR-18-629694-A

         JUDGMENT: AFFIRMED AND REMANDED

          Michael C. O'Malley, Cuyahoga County Prosecutor, and Eben McNair, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.

          Mancino Mancino & Mancino, and Paul A. Mancino, Jr., for appellant,

          JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION

          PATRICIA ANN BLACKMON, JUDGE.

         {¶ 1} Defendant-appellant John P. Gossett appeals from his conviction for burglary. He assigns the following errors for our review:

I. Defendant was denied due process of law when he was sentenced to a consecutive sentence without any appropriate findings.
II. Defendant was denied due process of law when the court accepted a plea to an amended indictment without determining whether defendant understood the nature of the charge.

         {¶ 2} Having reviewed the record and the controlling case law, we affirm but remand for the trial court to issue a nunc pro tunc sentencing journal entry in compliance with State v. Bonnell, 140 Ohio St.3d 209, 2014-Ohio-3177, 16 N.E.3d 659.

         {¶ 3} On June 20, 2018, Gossett was indicted in a two-count indictment. Count 1 charged him with burglary with notice of a prior conviction and a repeat violent offender specification. Count 2 charged him with petty theft. On August 14, 2018, Gossett pled guilty to burglary, and the remainder of the indictment was dismissed. The following month, he was sentenced to eight years of imprisonment with three years of postrelease control sanctions. The court ordered the sentence to be served consecutively to Gossett's six-year sentence for burglary in Cuyahoga C.P. No. CR-18-623409-A.

         Consecutive Sentences

         {¶ 4} In the first assigned error, Gossett argues that the trial court failed to make the findings required under R.C. 2929.14(C) before imposing consecutive sentences.

         {¶ 5} Pursuant to R.C. 2953.08(G)(2)(a), an appellate court may "increase, reduce, or otherwise modify a sentence * * * or may vacate the sentence and remand the matter to the sentencing court for resentencing" if it "clearly and convincingly" finds that "the record does not support the sentencing court's findings" under R.C. 2929.14(C)(4).

         {¶ 6} In order to impose consecutive sentences, the trial court must find that (1) consecutive sentences are necessary to protect the public from future crime or to punish the offender, (2) consecutive sentences are not disproportionate to the seriousness of the offender's conduct and to ...


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.