State v. Myers , 2015 Ohio 4789 ( 2015 )

[Cite as State v. Myers, 2015-Ohio-4789.]
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
MONTGOMERY COUNTY
STATE OF OHIO :
:
Plaintiff-Appellee : C.A. CASE NO. 26161
:
v. : T.C. NO. 13CRB10811
:
GENEICE MYERS : (Criminal appeal from
: Municipal Court)
Defendant-Appellant :
:
...........
OPINION
Rendered on the ___20th___ day of ____November___, 2015.
...........
STEPHANIE L. COOK, Atty. Reg. No. 0067101 and EBONY N. WREH, Atty, Reg. No.
0080629, Assistant City Prosecutor, 335 W. Third Street, Rm. 372, Dayton, Ohio 45402
Attorney for Plaintiff-Appellee
THOMAS B. SCOTT, Atty. Reg. No. 0075341, Suite 2103, 130 W. Second Street, Dayton,
Ohio 45402
Attorney for Defendant-Appellant
.............
DONOVAN, J.
{¶ 1} This matter is before the court on the Notice of Appeal of Geneice Myers,
filed April 8, 2014. Myers was convicted, following a January 23, 2014 bench trial in
Dayton Municipal Court, of one count of telecommunications harassment, in violation of
-2-
R.C. 2917.21(B), a misdemeanor of the first degree. She received a sentence of 180
days, with 180 days suspended, and six months of community control sanctions, requiring
25 hours of community service to be completed by July 11, 2014, and basic supervision
for six months. Myers was further ordered to complete a one-day anger management
class through the probation department. Myers was released from community control
on October 27, 2014.
{¶ 2} Myers asserts three assignments of error herein as follows:
THE COURT COMMITTED REVESIBLE ERROR BY DENYING
APPELLANT’S MOTION FOR ACQUITTAL PURSUANT TO CRIMINAL
RULE 29.
And,
THE APPELLANT’S CONVICTION FOR TELEPHONE
HARASSMENT WAS AGAINTST THE MANIFEST WIGHT OF THE
EVIDENCE.
And,
THE APPELLAN’T CONDUCT DID NOT RISE TO THE LEVEL OF
ABUSE, THREAT OR HARASS. (SIC)
{¶ 3} Myers did not seek a stay of her misdemeanor sentence. As this Court has
previously noted:
* * * It is well-settled that “where a criminal defendant, convicted of
a misdemeanor, voluntarily satisfies the judgment imposed upon him or her
for that offense, an appeal from the conviction is moot unless the defendant
has offered evidence from which an inference can be drawn that he or she
-3-
will suffer some collateral legal disability or loss of civil rights stemming from
that conviction.” * * *
State v. Byrd, 185 Ohio App. 3d 30, 2009-Ohio-5606, 923 N.E.2d 161, ¶ 10 (2d Dist.).
{¶ 4} Myers has satisfied her misdemeanor sentence. She did not seek a stay
from the trial court or this Court and offers no evidence of a collateral consequence of her
conviction. Accordingly her moot appeal is dismissed.
..........
FAIN, J. and WELBAUM, J., concur.
Copies mailed to:
Stephanie L. Cook
Ebony N. Wreh
Thomas B. Scott
Hon. Christopher D. Roberts