Skip to main content
· 3/7/2024

State v. Honey

Citations

  • 2024 Ohio 834

Syllabus

R.C. 2929.11 R.C. 2929.12 felony sentencing sentence contrary to law. Appellant, a repeat felon, pled guilty to robbery, a felony of the third degree, for committing a bank robbery in which he handed the teller a note that he said he had a gun. The trial court stated that it considered all required factors and principles of felony sentencing according to the Revised Code, noted the nature of the crime, the effect of robbery on victims, and recited Honey's criminal history in imposing a 36-month sentence. Appellant argued the sentence was contrary to law. He stated that the trial court's questioning of why the charges were reduced and its statements regarding the effect of the robbery on victims were impermissible considerations under R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12. A sentence is contrary to law where (1) the sentence falls outside the statutory range for the particular degree of offense, or (2) the trial court failed to consider the statutory purposes and principles of felony sentencing set forth in R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12. The trial court imposed a 36-month sentence for robbery a term of imprisonment authorized by law, and the record reflects the trial court considered the purposes and principles and applicable factors of felony sentencing. The sentence imposed was not contrary to law.

Judges: Sheehan

Read full opinion on CourtListener

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.