DocketNumber: Case No. 04AP-452.
Citation Numbers: 2004 Ohio 6610
Judges: BROWN, J.
Filed Date: 12/9/2004
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 4/18/2021
{¶ 2} On November 26, 2003, appellant took a woman's purse from a shopping cart at a store. He was apprehended by the store's owner after a scuffle. On December 5, 2003, appellant was charged with one count of theft, a fifth-degree felony, one count of robbery, a second-degree felony, and one count of robbery, a third-degree felony. After initially pleading not guilty, appellant pled guilty to a stipulated lesser-included offense of attempted robbery, a fourth-degree felony, and the remaining counts were dismissed. After reviewing a pre-sentence report, which included the fact that appellant had never served a prison term, on March 29, 2004, the trial court sentenced appellant to 12 months of incarceration, which was more than the minimum sentence. Appellant appeals the judgment, asserting the following assignments of error:
Assignment of Error No. 1:
The trial court erred by imposing a prison term for a fourth degree felony without complying with the statutory guidelines.
Assignment of Error No. 2:
The trial court erred by imposing a prison term longer than the minimum without complying with the statutory guidelines.
{¶ 3} Appellant argues in his first assignment of error that the trial court erred in imposing a prison term for a fourth-degree felony without complying with the statutory guidelines. R.C.
{¶ 4} In the present case, the only statement made by the trial court with regard to sentencing was the following:
* * * Well, I think it's a very serious case. And simply what it is [is] a purse snatching from a lady's shopping cart. There was a scuffle. My understanding from the facts the defendant shouldered his way through the aisle past another person. I think it shows the public needs to be protected from the defendant. And I think to impose a nonprison sentence would degrade the seriousness of this offense. * * *
{¶ 5} The state concedes the trial court failed to make the requisite findings. We agree. The trial court did not find that any of the factors in R.C.
{¶ 6} Appellant argues in his second assignment of error that the trial court erred by imposing a prison term longer than the minimum without complying with the statutory guidelines. As we have determined that the trial court did not make the appropriate findings to sentence appellant to prison, and the matter must be remanded for resentencing, appellant's second assignment of error challenging a non-minimum prison sentence is rendered moot. SeeState v. Wise, Logan App. No. 8-03-18,
{¶ 7} Accordingly, appellant's first assignment of error is sustained, and his second assignment of error is moot. The judgment of the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas is reversed, and this matter is remanded to that court for resentencing.
Judgment reversed, cause remanded.
Bryant and McCormac, JJ., concur.
McCormac, J., retired of the Tenth Appellate District, assigned to active duty under authority of Section