State v. Campbell , 2022 Ohio 621 ( 2022 )

[Cite as State v. Campbell, 2022-Ohio-621.]
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO
EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA
STATE OF OHIO, :
Plaintiff-Appellee, :
No. 109822
v. :
SANTANA CAMPBELL, :
Defendant-Appellant. :
JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION
JUDGMENT: AFFIRMED
RELEASED AND JOURNALIZED: March 3, 2022
Criminal Appeal from the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas
Case No. CR-19-644805-A
Appearances:
Michael C. O’Malley, Cuyahoga County Prosecuting
Attorney, and John F. Hirschauer, Assistant Prosecuting
Attorney, for appellee.
Cullen Sweeney, Cuyahoga County Public Defender, and
Erika B. Cunliffe, Assistant Public Defender, for
appellant.
MARY J. BOYLE, P.J.:
Defendant-appellant, Santana Campbell (“Campbell”), appeals his
sentence. He raises the following single assignment of error for review:
As amended by the Reagan Tokes Act, the Revised Code’s sentences for
first and second degree qualifying felonies violates [Campbell’s] rights
under United States and Ohio Constitutions.
For the reasons set forth below, we affirm the trial court’s judgment.
I. Procedural History
In October 2019, Campbell was charged, along with codefendants,
Jermaine Singleton and Peirion Jackson, in a 21-count indictment, including
multiple counts of robbery, aggravated robbery, theft, and felonious assault.1
Campbell was also charged with participating in a criminal gang, criminal
damaging, receiving stolen property, intimidation, attempted retaliation, and
attempted obstructing justice. Most of the counts also included one- and three-year
firearm specifications. The charges stemmed from four carjacking incidents that
occurred between May 2, 2019, and May 18, 2019.
Campbell did not turn 16 until May 14, 2019, so his case originated in
juvenile court. The matter was transferred to the general division in October 7, 2019.
In June 2020, Campbell pled guilty to the following amended counts: participating
in a criminal gang, intimidation of a witness, and four counts of aggravated robbery,
with either a one- or three-year firearm specification attached. The remaining
counts were nolled. As part of the plea agreement, Campbell agreed to no contact
with the victims and an agreed sentence of eight years (with no consideration of
judicial release). Campbell was also advised of the Reagan Tokes Act as it applied to
1 Neither codefendant has filed an appeal as of the date of this opinion.
his sentence. The trial court sentenced Campbell to eight to ten-and-a-half year in
prison. At sentencing, Campbell’s counsel objected to the imposition of a Reagan
Tokes sentence, contending that the Act is unconstitutional.
It is from this judgment that Campbell now appeals.
II. Reagan Tokes
In his sole assignment of error, Campbell argues that the trial court
erred in imposing an indefinite sentence pursuant to the Reagan Tokes Act because
the Act violates the United States and Ohio Constitutions. Specifically, he argues
that the Act violates his constitutional right to a jury trial, separation of powers, and
due process. He requests that we vacate the indefinite part of his sentence that was
imposed under Reagan Tokes.
However, pursuant to our recent en banc decision in State v.
Delvallie, 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 109315, 2022-Ohio-470, this court has
determined that challenges to the Reagan Tokes Act are ripe for review and that the
Act is constitutional.2
Accordingly, the sole assignment of error is overruled.
Judgment is affirmed.
It is ordered that appellee recover from appellant costs herein taxed.
2 As the writer of this merit panel decision, I am constrained to follow the law as
determined by the close vote in the en banc majority court in Delvallie. However, as I
expressed in my separate concurring-in-judgment-only opinion in Delvallie and in my
dissenting opinion in the original panel decision in State v. Gamble, 8th Dist. Cuyahoga
No. 109613, 2021-Ohio-1810, it is my view that challenges in a direct appeal under the
Reagan Tokes Act are not yet ripe for review.
The court finds there were reasonable grounds for this appeal.
It is ordered that a special mandate issue out of this court directing the
common pleas court to carry this judgment into execution. The defendant’s
conviction having been affirmed, any bail pending is terminated. Case remanded to
the trial court for execution of sentence.
A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to Rule 27
of the Rules of Appellate Procedure.
MARY J. BOYLE, PRESIDING JUDGE
SEAN C. GALLAGHER, A.J., and
EILEEN A. GALLAGHER, J., CONCUR