FROM JUDGMENT ENTERED IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS COUNTY OF
SUMMIT, OHIO CASE No. CR-2014-07-2178(B)
KRISTIE M. GUISER, pro se, Appellant.
BEVAN WALSH, Prosecuting Attorney, and JACQUENETTE S. CORGAN,
Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for Appellee.
DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY
JENNIFER HENSAL, JUDGE.
Kristie Guiser appeals a judgment of the Summit County Court
of Common Pleas that denied her motion for jail-time credit.
For the following reasons, this Court reverses.
In 2014, Ms. Guiser pleaded guilty to one count of aggravated
possession of drugs. The trial court found her guilty of the
offense and sentenced her to 30 months of community control,
advising her that, if she violated the conditions of her
community control, it would sentence her to one year in
prison and order it to run consecutive to a sentence she had
received in a different case.
Three weeks after sentencing, Ms. Guiser violated the
conditions of her community control. The trial court found
her guilty of the violation and ordered her to serve one year
in prison consecutive to the two-year sentence she had
received in a different case. The court credited her 145 days
for time she had already served in jail and a community-based
correctional facility (CBCF).
After Ms. Guiser served more than 500 days in prison, the
trial court granted her judicial release and placed her on
two years of community control. Ms. Guiser violated the
conditions of her community control three times. The first
two times, the court continued her on community control. The
third time the trial court sentenced her to one year in
prison to be served consecutively to a two-year sentence it
had imposed for her community control violation in a
different case, for a total of three years imprisonment. It
credited her "an aggregate total of 67 days of jail
credit * * * since the time she was released from prison on
judicial release." The court also wrote in its entry
that "Defendant's previously calculated jail time
credit prior to the original imposition of sentence, along
with the time served in the Ohio State Reformatory for Women,
is not included in this calculation."
Ms. Guiser did not appeal her sentence. Instead, she filed a
motion for jail-time credit, arguing that she had only
received 67 days of credit and that the trial court should
have included the time she spent in jail and a CBCF before
her first prison stay. The trial court denied her motion. Ms.
Guiser subsequently filed a request for a nunc pro tunc entry
and a motion to calculate and amend her jail time and prison
credit, arguing that the court's jail time credit should
have included all of the time she spent in jail, a CBCF, or
prison before her judicial release. The trial court denied
her motion. Ms. Guiser has appealed, assigning as error that
the trial court failed to properly calculate and credit her
prior jail and prison time.
THE TRIAL COURT DENIED THE DEFENDANT-APPELLANT DUE PROCESS
AND EQUAL PROTECTION UNDER THE LAW WHERE IT FAILED TO
CALCULATE AND CREDIT THE DEFENDANT'S CONFINEMENT
(JAIL-TIME) CREDIT AND PRIOR INCARCERATION IN ITS SENTENCING
Ms. Guiser argues that the trial court incorrectly concluded
that she was not entitled to any additional jail-time credit.
Revised Code Section 2929.19(B)(2)(g) provides that, at
sentencing, if a court ...