State v. Hicks

Citations

• 2019 Ohio 870

Syllabus

Consecutive sentences R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) proportionality finding clearly and convincingly not supported by the record nunc pro tunc. Although trial court did not state verbatim at the sentencing hearing that consecutive sentences would not be disproportionate to the seriousness of defendant's conduct and the danger defendant poses to the public, requisite proportionality finding could be discerned from the trial court's statements on the record when viewed in their entirety. Trial court's findings under R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) were not clearly and convincingly unsupported by the record. Sentences affirmed remanded in part for the trial court to issue a nunc pro tunc order incorporating the consecutive sentence findings made at the sentencing hearing into its sentencing journal entry.