State v. Rabe , 2013 Ohio 4867 ( 2013 )


Menu:
  • [Cite as State v. Rabe, 
    2013-Ohio-4867
    .]
    IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
    TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO
    CLERMONT COUNTY
    STATE OF OHIO,                                    :
    Plaintiff-Appellee,                       :     CASE NO. CA2013-04-027
    :            OPINION
    - vs -                                                      11/4/2013
    :
    DAVID L. RABE,                                    :
    Defendant-Appellant.                      :
    CRIMINAL APPEAL FROM CLERMONT COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
    Case No. 2009-CR-0583
    D. Vincent Faris, Clermont County Prosecuting Attorney, Judith A. Brant, 76 S. Riverside
    Drive, 2nd Floor, Batavia, Ohio 45103, for plaintiff-appellee
    David L. Rabe, #A676-659, London Correctional Institution, P.O. Box 69, London, Ohio
    43140, defendant-appellant, pro se
    RINGLAND, P.J.
    {¶ 1} Defendant-appellant, David L. Rabe, appeals from the judgment of the
    Clermont County Common Pleas Court denying his motion to correct an unlawful sentence.
    For the reasons that follow, we reverse the trial court's judgment and remand this cause for
    further proceedings.
    {¶ 2} In 2010, appellant was convicted of operating a motor vehicle while under the
    Clermont CA2013-04-027
    influence of alcohol or drugs (OVI) in violation of R.C. 4511.19(A)(1)(a), a felony of the fourth
    degree, for which he was sentenced to five years of community control. As one of the terms
    and conditions of his community control, appellant was ordered to serve 60 days in the
    Clermont County Jail. The trial court's sentencing entry notified appellant that any violation of
    the terms of his sentence could lead to a longer or more restrictive sanction, including a
    prison term of 29 months.
    {¶ 3} In 2012, appellant was again arrested and charged with OVI. As a result, the
    trial court revoked appellant's community control and sentenced him to 29 months in prison.
    Two months later, appellant filed a motion to correct an unlawful sentence, arguing that,
    under R.C. 2929.15(B) and 2929.14(A), the maximum possible prison sentence the trial court
    could have imposed on him for violating the terms of his community control was 18 months,
    notwithstanding the fact that he was provided with notice at his original sentencing hearing
    that the court could impose a prison sentence of 29 months if he violated the terms of his
    community control.
    {¶ 4} The trial court overruled appellant's motion to correct an unlawful sentence.
    The trial court determined that, while R.C. 2929.14(A) provided the "general sentencing
    guideline" for fourth-degree felony offenses, R.C. 2929.14(B)(4) provided the "more specific
    sentencing guideline" for fourth-degree felony OVI offenses.            The trial court further
    determined that R.C. 2929.14(B)(4) "specifically provides the potential sentence of six
    months to thirty months in prison, with the applicable mandatory incarceration time of sixty
    days." Therefore, the trial court concluded that appellant's 29-month prison sentence was
    lawful under R.C. 2929.14(B)(4).
    {¶ 5} Rabe now appeals from the trial court's decision overruling his motion to correct
    an unlawful sentence and assigns the following as error:
    {¶ 6} "A COMMON PLEAS COURT IS LIMITED TO A SENTENCE THAT IS
    -2-
    Clermont CA2013-04-027
    EXPRESSLY AUTHORIZED BY LAW AND A TWENTY-NINE MONTH SENTENCE FOR A
    FIRST TIME FELONY DUI OFFENDER WHO VIOLATED COMMUNITY CONTROL AND
    WHO SERVED A SIXTY DAY MANDATORY LOCAL INCARCERATION TERM IS NOT SO
    AUTHORIZED AND IS THUS VOID."
    {¶ 7} Appellant argues that because he was a first-time felony OVI offender and the
    trial court already had sentenced him to a mandatory 60-day term of local incarceration under
    R.C. 2929.13(G)(1), the maximum penalty that the trial court could impose on him for
    violating his community control was one year of local incarceration. He acknowledges that
    the trial court notified him at the time of his original sentencing that if he violated the terms of
    his community control, he could be sentenced to 29 months in prison, but he asserts that this
    portion of his original sentence was erroneous, too.
    {¶ 8} Initially, appellant did not file a direct appeal from the trial court's decision to
    resentence him to 29 months in prison for violating the terms of his community control, and
    the argument that he is raising on appeal is different from the one he raised in the trial court.
    Nevertheless, "[n]o court has the authority to impose a sentence that is contrary to law,"
    State v. Fischer, 
    128 Ohio St.3d 92
    , 
    2010-Ohio-6238
    , ¶ 23; a motion to correct an unlawful or
    illegal sentence is "an appropriate vehicle for raising the claim that a sentence is facially
    illegal at any time," id. at ¶ 25; and application of the principles of res judicata and issue
    preclusion are disfavored with respect to sentences that do not comply with statutory
    mandates. Id. at ¶ 35.
    {¶ 9} R.C. 2929.15(B) states in relevant part:
    (B)(1) If the conditions of a community control sanction are violated
    * * *, the sentencing court may impose upon the violator one or
    more of the following penalties:
    ***
    (c) A prison term on the offender pursuant to section 2929.14 of the
    -3-
    Clermont CA2013-04-027
    Revised Code.
    (2) The prison term, if any, imposed upon a violator pursuant to this
    division shall be within the range of prison terms available for the
    offense for which the sanction that was violated was imposed and
    shall not exceed the prison term specified in the notice provided to
    the offender at the sentencing hearing pursuant to division (B)(2) of
    section 2929.19 of the Revised Code.
    {¶ 10} In this case, the "offense for which the sanction that was violated was imposed"
    was a fourth-degree felony OVI offense. Appellant acknowledges that the 29-month prison
    term that the trial court imposed on him for violating the terms of his community control does
    not exceed the prison term specified in the notice provided to him at his original sentencing
    hearing. The remaining issue before us, then, is whether the 29-month prison sentence is
    within the range of prison terms available for a fourth-degree felony OVI offense.
    {¶ 11} R.C. 2929.14(A) states in relevant part:
    (A) Except as provided in division * * * (B)(4) * * *, if the court
    imposing a sentence upon an offender for a felony elects or is
    required to impose a prison term on the offender pursuant to this
    chapter, the court shall impose a definite prison term that shall be
    one of the following:
    ***
    (4) For a felony of the fourth degree, the prison term shall be six,
    seven, eight, nine, ten, eleven, twelve, thirteen, fourteen, fifteen,
    sixteen, seventeen, or eighteen months.
    {¶ 12} R.C. 2929.14(B)(4) states in pertinent part:
    If the offender is being sentenced for a * * * fourth degree felony
    OVI offense under division (G)(2) of section 2929.13 of the Revised
    Code, the sentencing court shall impose upon the offender a
    mandatory prison term in accordance with that division. In addition
    to the mandatory prison term, if the offender is being sentenced for
    a fourth degree felony OVI offense, the court, notwithstanding
    division (A)(4) of this section, may sentence the offender to a
    definite prison term of not less than six months and not more than
    thirty months[.] * * *
    If the offender is being sentenced for a fourth degree felony OVI
    offense under division (G)(1) of section 2929.13 of the Revised
    -4-
    Clermont CA2013-04-027
    Code and the court imposes a mandatory term of local
    incarceration, the court may impose a prison term as described in
    division (A)(1) of that section.
    {¶ 13} The trial court initially determined that R.C. 2929.14(B)(4) was the controlling
    statute in this case because it specifically deals with sentencing fourth-degree felony OVI
    offenders. The trial court then determined that it was permitted to impose a 29-month prison
    sentence on appellant by virtue of the language in the first paragraph of that section, which
    the trial court found, "specifically provides the potential sentence of six months to thirty
    months in prison[.]" However, the trial court's decision overlooks the plain language of R.C.
    2929.14(B)(4).
    {¶ 14} The language in the first paragraph of R.C. 2929.14(B)(4) states that "[i]n
    addition to the mandatory prison term, if the offender is being sentenced for a fourth degree
    felony OVI offense, the court, notwithstanding division (A)(4) of this section, may sentence
    the offender to a definite prison term of not less than six months and not more than thirty
    months[.]" This language strongly indicates that it applies only at the original sentencing of
    the fourth degree felony OVI offender. Moreover, this language expressly states that it
    applies only where the sentencing court chooses to sentence the offender to a 60-day
    mandatory prison term under R.C. 2929.13(G)(2) rather than a 60-day mandatory term of
    local incarceration under R.C. 2929.13(G)(1). There is no provision in the first paragraph of
    R.C. 2929.14(B)(4) that applies to the situation present here, in which a fourth-degree felony
    OVI offender has been sentenced to a 60-day mandatory term of local incarceration, which
    he has served, along with a five-year community control sanction, which he has violated.
    {¶ 15} The second paragraph of R.C. 2929.14(B)(4) states that "[i]f the offender is
    being sentenced for a fourth degree felony OVI offense under division (G)(1) of section
    2929.13 of the Revised Code and the court imposes a mandatory term of local incarceration,
    the court may impose a prison term as described in division (A)(1) of that section." R.C.
    -5-
    Clermont CA2013-04-027
    2929.13(A)(1) states that "[i]f the court imposes upon the offender a community control
    sanction and the offender violates any condition of the community control sanction, the court
    may take any action prescribed in division (B) of section 2929.15 of the Revised Code
    relative to the offender including imposing a prison term on the offender pursuant to that
    division." R.C. 2929.15(B) authorizes a sentencing court to impose on an offender who has
    violated the conditions of his community control a prison term under R.C. 2929.14 but does
    not specify what division of that section should apply.
    {¶ 16} R.C. 4511.19(G)(1)(d)(i) and 2929.13(G) govern the original sentencing of
    fourth-degree felony OVI offenders. R.C. 4511.19(G)(1)(d)(i) provides that when sentencing
    a fourth-degree felony OVI offender who has not been convicted of, or pled guilty to, an R.C.
    2941.1413 specification, a court may sentence the offender either to a mandatory term of
    local incarceration of 60 days in accordance with R.C. 2929.13(G)(1) or to a mandatory
    prison term in accordance with R.C. 2929.13(G)(2). The phrase "mandatory term of local
    incarceration," includes sentencing the offender to jail. R.C. 2929.01(II).
    {¶ 17} R.C. 4511.19(G)(1)(d)(i) states in pertinent part:
    If the court imposes a mandatory term of local incarceration, it may
    impose a jail term in addition to the sixty-day mandatory term, the
    cumulative total of the mandatory term and the jail term for the
    offense shall not exceed one year, and, except as provided in
    division (A)(1) of section 2929.13 of the Revised Code, no prison
    term is authorized for the offense. If the court imposes a mandatory
    prison term, notwithstanding division (A)(4) of section 2929.14 of
    the Revised Code, it also may sentence the offender to a definite
    prison term that shall be not less than six months and not more than
    thirty months and the prison terms shall be imposed as described in
    division (G)(2) of section 2929.13 of the Revised Code. If the court
    imposes a mandatory prison term or mandatory prison term and
    additional prison term, in addition to the term or terms so imposed,
    the court also may sentence the offender to a community control
    sanction for the offense, but the offender shall serve all of the
    prison terms so imposed prior to serving the community control
    sanction.
    {¶ 18} R.C. 2929.13(A)(1) states that "[i]f the court imposes upon the offender a
    -6-
    Clermont CA2013-04-027
    community control sanction and the offender violates any condition of the community control
    sanction, the court may take any action prescribed in division (B) of section 2929.15 of the
    Revised Code relative to the offender, including imposing a prison term on the offender
    pursuant to that division."
    {¶ 19} R.C. 2929.13(G) states in pertinent part:
    (G) * * * [I]f an offender is being sentenced for a fourth degree
    felony OVI offense * * *, the court shall impose upon the offender a
    mandatory term of local incarceration or a mandatory prison term in
    accordance with the following:
    (1) If the offender is being sentenced for a fourth degree felony OVI
    offense * * *, the court may impose upon the offender a mandatory
    term of local incarceration of sixty days * * * as specified in division
    (G)(1)(d) of section 4511.19 of the Revised Code. * * *
    (2) * * * [I]f the offender is being sentenced for a fourth degree
    felony OVI offense and the court does not impose a mandatory
    term of local incarceration under division (G)(1) of this section, the
    court * * * shall impose upon the offender a mandatory prison term
    of sixty days * * * as specified in division (G)(1)(d) * * * of section
    4511.19 of the Revised Code[.]
    {¶ 20} R.C. 4511.19(G)(1)(d)(i) and 2929.13(G) provide courts with two general
    options for sentencing fourth-degree felony OVI offenders. Under the first option, the
    sentencing court must order the offender to serve a 60-day mandatory term of local
    incarceration under R.C. 2929.13(G)(1) and may order the offender to serve an additional jail
    term, with the cumulative total of the mandatory 60-day term of local incarceration and the
    additional jail term not to exceed one year. Under the second option, the sentencing court
    must order the offender to serve a 60-day mandatory prison term under R.C. 2929.13(G)(2)
    and may order the offender to serve a definite prison term of not less than six months and not
    more than 30 months.
    {¶ 21} In addition to these two general sentencing options, R.C. 2929.15(A)(1) allows
    a court that is sentencing a fourth-degree felony OVI offender under either R.C.
    -7-
    Clermont CA2013-04-027
    2929.13(G)(1) or 2929.13(G)(2) to impose upon the offender a community control sanction of
    combination of community control sanctions in accordance with R.C. 2929.16 and 2929.17,
    in addition to the mandatory periods of local incarceration, mandatory prison terms and/or
    mandatory fines imposed on the offender.
    {¶ 22} At the time of appellant's original sentencing, the trial court ordered appellant to
    serve 60 days in the Clermont County Jail, and thus sentenced him to a mandatory term of
    local incarceration under R.C. 2929.13(G)(1). The trial court did not impose an additional jail
    term on appellant as it was permitted to do under R.C. 4511.19(G)(1)(d)(i). Instead, the court
    imposed a five-year period of community control on appellant, as it was permitted to do under
    R.C. 2929.15(A)(1). However, the court notified appellant that if he violated the terms of his
    community control, he could be sentenced to a 29-month prison term, and when appellant
    violated the terms of his community control, the trial court revoked his community control and
    sentenced him to 29 months in prison. The trial court cited no authority for its decision to
    "mix and match" the various possible sanctions set forth in R.C. 4511.19(G)(1)(d)(i).
    However, under the plain words of that section, the definite prison term of not less than 6
    months and not more than 30 months can be applied only where the trial court has imposed
    a 60-day mandatory prison term on the offender.
    {¶ 23} R.C. 4511.19(G)(1)(d)(i) states that "[i]f the court imposes a mandatory prison
    term, notwithstanding division (A)(4) of section 2929.14 of the Revised Code, it also may
    sentence the offender to a definite prison term that shall be not less than six months and not
    more than thirty months and the prison terms shall be imposed as described in division (G)(2)
    of section 2929.13 of the Revised Code." Likewise, R.C. 2929.13(G)(2) states that "if the
    offender is being sentenced for a fourth degree felony OVI offense and the court does not
    impose a mandatory term of local incarceration under division (G)(1) of this section, the court
    * * * shall impose upon the offender a mandatory prison term of sixty days * * * as specified in
    -8-
    Clermont CA2013-04-027
    division (G)(1)(d) * * * of section 4511.19 of the Revised Code[.]"
    {¶ 24} Additionally, R.C. 2929.14(B)(4), which is the section relied upon by the trial
    court, states that
    [i]f the offender is being sentenced for a * * * fourth degree felony
    OVI offense under division (G)(2) of section 2929.13 of the Revised
    Code, the sentencing court shall impose upon the offender a
    mandatory prison term in accordance with that division. In addition
    to the mandatory prison term, if the offender is being sentenced for
    a fourth degree felony OVI offense, the court, notwithstanding
    division (A)(4) of this section, may sentence the offender to a
    definite prison term of not less than six months and not more than
    thirty months[.]
    {¶ 25} As can be seen from the foregoing, the imposition of a definite prison term from
    six months to 30 months is dependent upon the imposition of a 60-day mandatory prison
    sentence. In this case, however, the trial court did not impose a 60-day mandatory prison
    sentence but, instead, imposed a 60-day period of local incarceration. Consequently, the
    definite prison term from six months to 30 months has no application in cases where the trial
    court has imposed a mandatory 60-day term of local incarceration rather than a mandatory
    60-day prison term. Therefore the trial court erred in finding that it was authorized under R.C.
    2929.14(B)(4) to impose a 29-month prison sentence on appellant for violating the terms of
    his community control. However, we disagree with appellant's argument that the trial court
    was not permitted to sentence him to any prison term for violating the terms of his community
    control, but instead, was only permitted to sentence him to one year in jail.
    {¶ 26} R.C. 4511.19(G)(1)(d)(i) states that, if the sentencing court imposes a
    mandatory term of local incarceration, the court may impose a jail term in addition to the 60-
    day mandatory term, but the cumulative total of the mandatory term and the jail term for the
    offense must not exceed one year, and "except as provided in division (A)(1) of section
    2929.13 of the Revised Code, no prison term is authorized for the offense." (Emphasis
    added.) R.C. 2929.13(A)(1) states that, if an offender violates any condition of a community
    -9-
    Clermont CA2013-04-027
    control sanction imposed on him, the sentencing court may take any action prescribed in
    R.C. 2929.15(B) "relative to the offender, including imposing a prison term on the offender
    pursuant to that division." R.C. 2929.15(B)(1)(c) provides that, if the offender violates the
    conditions of his community control, the trial court may impose a prison term under R.C.
    2929.14. R.C. 2929.14(B)(4) does not apply for the reasons set forth above. Because R.C.
    2929.14(B)(4) does not apply in this case, R.C. 2929.14(A) does apply, and the maximum
    prison term for fourth-degree felony offenders that can be imposed under R.C. 2929.14(A)(4)
    is 18 months.
    {¶ 27} Accordingly, appellant's assignment of error is sustained to the extent indicated.
    {¶ 28} The judgment of the trial court is reversed, and this cause is remanded for
    resentencing consistent with this Opinion.
    PIPER and M. POWELL, JJ., concur.
    - 10 -
    

Document Info

Docket Number: CA2013-04-027

Citation Numbers: 2013 Ohio 4867

Judges: Ringland

Filed Date: 11/4/2013

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/30/2014