State v. Beckett ( 2021 )

[Cite as State v. Beckett, 2021-Ohio-1687.]
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO
BROWN COUNTY
STATE OF OHIO, : CASE NOS. CA2020-08-006
CA2020-08-007
Appellee, :
OPINION
: 5/17/2021
- vs -
:
JAMES R. BECKETT, :
Appellant. :
CRIMINAL APPEAL FROM BROWN COUNTY MUNICIPAL COURT
Case No. CRB 2000252 A
Zachary A. Corbin, Brown County Prosecuting Attorney, Mary McMullen, 740 Mt. Orab Pike,
Suite 1, Georgetown, Ohio 45121, for appellee
T. David Burgess Co., L.P.A., Kristopher D. Burgess, T. David Burgess, 110 North Third
Street, Williamsburg, Ohio 45176, for appellant
M. POWELL, P.J.
{¶ 1} Appellant, James Beckett, appeals his conviction in the Brown County
Municipal Court for menacing. For the reasons that follow, we dismiss this appeal for lack
of a final appealable order.
{¶ 2} Appellant was charged in March 2020 with resisting arrest in Case No. CRB
Brown CA2020-08-006
CA2020-08-007
2000252A, aggravated menacing against two police officers in Case No. CRB 2000252B,
aggravated menacing against a neighbor in Case No. CRB 2000252C, and obstructing
official business in Case No. CRB 2000252D. A bench trial was held on the charges. At
the conclusion of the trial, the trial court orally found appellant guilty of aggravated menacing
against the officers, a lesser-included offense of menacing against the neighbor, resisting
arrest, and obstructing official business.
{¶ 3} On July 14, 2020, the trial court journalized an entry, bearing only Case No.
CRB 2000252A, finding appellant guilty of aggravated menacing against one of the police
officers and menacing, presumably against the neighbor. As indicated above, Case No.
CRB 2000252A was assigned to the resisting arrest charge. The entry made no disposition
of the resisting arrest and obstructing official business charges and made no mention of
these charges.
{¶ 4} On July 21, 2020, the trial court journalized a sentencing entry, once again
bearing only Case No. CRB 2000252A. The sentencing entry indicates that a sentencing
hearing was held on July 20, 2020, that the trial court reviewed a presentence-investigative
report and the Ohio sentencing guidelines, and that appellant's "age and lack of a record
speaks for a minimum sentence, but [his] actions and lack of remorse call for a stiff
sentence." The sentencing entry then states, "Therefore the Court orders the Defendant to
serve 180 Days in the Brown County Adult Detention Center with credit for ten days." The
trial court further ordered that the firearm used during the incident be forfeited and that
appellant's other firearms be held by the police department "for three years as a condition
of [appellant's] probation if [appellant] is released on probation in the next six months." The
sentencing entry fails to state that appellant was convicted at all and does not mention any
of the criminal charges.
-2-
Brown CA2020-08-006
CA2020-08-007
{¶ 5} Appellant now appeals the July 21, 2020 sentencing entry and raises two
assignments of error, arguing that his conviction for menacing is against the manifest weight
of the evidence and challenging the confiscation of the firearms not involved in the offenses
as a condition of his three-year probation. The state argues there is no final appealable
order because the entry finding appellant guilty only addressed two of the four charges
against appellant. Furthermore, the sentencing entry neither sets forth the fact of each of
the four convictions nor imposes a sentence for three of the convictions.
{¶ 6} It is well established that a court of appeals has no jurisdiction over orders
that are not final and appealable. State v. Baker, 119 Ohio St.3d 197, 2008-Ohio-3330, ¶
6. "[A] judgment of conviction is a final, appealable order if it complies with Crim.R. 32(C)
and State v. Lester, 130 Ohio St.3d 303, 2011-Ohio-5204[.]" State v. Jackson, 151 Ohio
St.3d 239, 2017-Ohio-7469, ¶ 9. Crim.R. 32(C) provides that
A judgment of conviction shall set forth the fact of conviction and
the sentence. Multiple judgments of conviction may be
addressed in one judgment entry. If the defendant is found not
guilty or for any other reason is entitled to be discharged, the
court shall render judgment accordingly. The judge shall sign
the judgment and the clerk shall enter it on the journal. A
judgment is effective only when entered on the journal by the
clerk.
{¶ 7} "[A] judgment of conviction is a final order subject to appeal under R.C.
2505.02 when the judgment entry sets forth (1) the fact of the conviction, (2) the sentence,
(3) the judge's signature, and (4) the time stamp indicating the entry upon the journal by the
clerk." Lester at ¶ 14. These are the "substantive requirements" of Crim.R. 32(C) "that
must be included within a judgment entry of conviction to make it final for purposes of
appeal[.]" Id. at ¶ 11. Thus, "[a] final appealable order does not exist unless the fact of
conviction and the sentence are stated in a single judgment." State v. Sullivan, 11th Dist.
Lake Nos. 2019-L-004 and 2019-L-005, 2019-Ohio-4413, ¶ 3. Furthermore, "a valid
-3-
Brown CA2020-08-006
CA2020-08-007
judgment of conviction requires a full resolution of any counts for which there were
convictions." Jackson at ¶ 11.
{¶ 8} The record clearly shows that the trial court found appellant guilty of four
criminal charges: after conducting the bench trial, the trial court orally found appellant guilty
of aggravated menacing against the officers, menacing against the neighbor, resisting
arrest, and obstructing official business. However, the July 14, 2020 entry finding appellant
guilty only addresses the charges of menacing and aggravated menacing and neither
disposes of nor mentions the resisting arrest and obstructing official business charges.
Furthermore, the July 21, 2020 sentencing entry does not comply with Crim.R. 32(C) and
Lester. Specifically, while the sentencing entry is signed by the trial judge and was entered
upon the journal by the clerk of court, it does not set forth the fact of each of the four
convictions and in fact fails to state that appellant was convicted at all. And while the
sentencing entry sets forth a sentence, it fails to identify the conviction for which the
sentence is imposed and further does not impose a sentence for the other three convictions.
State v. Rexrode, 10th Dist. Franklin No. 17AP-8837, ¶ 13, 15; Sullivan at ¶ 3.
{¶ 9} In light of the foregoing, the July 21, 2020 sentencing entry is not a final
appealable order and we lack jurisdiction to address the merits of appellant's appeal.
{¶ 10} Appeal dismissed.
S. POWELL and HENDRICKSON, JJ., concur.
-4-