State v. Conley

Citations

• 2025 Ohio 5525

Syllabus

Consecutive sentences; failure to comply; mandatory consecutive term; operation of law; R.C. 2921.331(B); R.C. 2921.331(D); R.C. 2929.331(C)(3); R.C. 2929.14(C)(4); R.C. 2953.08(G)(2); contrary to law. Judgment affirmed. The trial court properly ordered appellant's 18-month prison term for fourth-degree failure to comply to run consecutively to his concurrent six-month prison terms for breaking and entering and attempted theft. R.C. 2921.331(D) mandates that any prison term imposed for a violation of R.C. 2921.331(B) be served consecutively to any other prison term, removing the trial court's discretion and eliminating any need for consecutive-sentence findings under R.C. 2929.14(C)(4). The sentence was therefore not contrary to law under R.C. 2953.08(G)(2). The record indicated that the trial court understood and applied the statutory mandate, advising appellant at the plea hearing that any prison term for failure to comply \must be consecutive\ and stating at the sentencing hearing that the sentence was \consecutive pursuant to law.\ Finally, because the R.C. 2921.331(D) mandate extends to prison terms imposed in different cases, the aggregate 24-month sentence was valid.