State v. Fultz

Citations

• 2019 Ohio 2593

Syllabus

The trial court did not err by imposing consecutive sentences. The sentences are not contrary to law and the record does not clearly and convincingly fail to support the trial court's consecutive-sentence findings. Trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to file an affidavit of indigency prior to sentencing where there was a reasonable probability that defendant could demonstrate that he could not afford to pay a mandatory fine. Upon terminating defendant's post-release control and sentencing him to prison for the remainder of his post-release control obligation, the trial court erred in calculating defendant's time remaining on post-release control based on the date of the new offense, rather than the date of sentencing. Judgment in Case No. 2017-CR-286 affirmed judgment in Case No. 2018-CR-100 affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for further proceedings. (Hall, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part.)