Skip to main content

State v. Banks

Citations

  • 2019 Ohio 980

Syllabus

Modification of sentence R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) — consecutive sentences. There is no necessity for modification of appellant's sentence. Although the trial court made a verbal miscalculation of appellant's sentence during the sentencing hearing, the correct sentence was entered on the record and in the court's sentencing entry. There was no retaliation against appellant where he was resentenced on remand. The trial court complied with R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) where it recited its findings at the sentencing hearing and incorporated those finding in the sentencing judgment entry. Additionally, appellant's sentence was less than the prior sentence.

Judges: Jones

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

2 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

7 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.