Filed: Feb. 19, 2015
Latest Update: Feb. 19, 2015
Summary: JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION MARY J. BOYLE, J. { 1} Defendant-appellant, Gregory Vans, appeals his sentence, raising the following single assignment of error: The trial court erred by failing to include in its journal entry its findings in support of its imposition of consecutive sentences. { 2} A trial court is required not only to make the statutory findings required for consecutive sentences at the sentencing hearing, but also to incorporate its findings into its sentencing entry. State v
Summary: JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION MARY J. BOYLE, J. { 1} Defendant-appellant, Gregory Vans, appeals his sentence, raising the following single assignment of error: The trial court erred by failing to include in its journal entry its findings in support of its imposition of consecutive sentences. { 2} A trial court is required not only to make the statutory findings required for consecutive sentences at the sentencing hearing, but also to incorporate its findings into its sentencing entry. State v...
More
JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION
MARY J. BOYLE, J.
{¶1} Defendant-appellant, Gregory Vans, appeals his sentence, raising the following single assignment of error:
The trial court erred by failing to include in its journal entry its findings in support of its imposition of consecutive sentences.
{¶2} A trial court is required not only to make the statutory findings required for consecutive sentences at the sentencing hearing, but also to incorporate its findings into its sentencing entry. State v. Bonnell, 140 Ohio St.3d 209, 2014-Ohio-3177, 16 N.E.3d 659, syllabus. The failure to include the findings is a "clerical mistake and does not render the sentence contrary to law." Id. at ¶ 30, citing State v. Qualls, 131 Ohio St.3d 499, 2012-Ohio-1111, 967 N.E.2d 718, ¶ 15. The omission may therefore be corrected through a nunc pro tunc entry "to reflect what actually occurred in open court." Id.
{¶3} The state, pursuant to Loc.App.R. 16(B), has conceded the error raised by Vans.1 Our review of the record confirms that the sentencing entry in this case does not include the consecutive sentence findings in the journal entry. Therefore, in accordance with Bonnell, we sustain this assignment of error and remand to the trial court for the limited purpose of incorporating the consecutive sentence findings made at sentencing into the court's entry.
{¶4} Judgment affirmed and case remanded for a new sentencing journal entry.
It is ordered that appellee recover from appellant the costs herein taxed.
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. 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.
MELODY J. STEWART, P.J., and SEAN C. GALLAGHER, J., CONCUR.
