State v. Nix

Citations

• 2018 Ohio 2898

Syllabus

APPELLATE REVIEW—SENTENCING—JURISDICTION—CONSTITUTIONAL LAW/CRIMINAL—CRIM.R. 36: The second appeal filed from the same common pleas court order was subject to dismissal as duplicative of the first appeal. The common pleas court properly declined, because it had no jurisdiction, to resentence defendant based on his claim in his postconviction motion that former R.C. 2929.14(D)(1)(b) precluded sentencing him for each firearm specification accompanying his two felonious-assault offenses. The constitutional protections against double jeopardy are not implicated by sentencing on multiple firearm specifications, because specifications are penalty enhancements, not offenses. The common pleas court erred in not correcting under Crim.R. 36 the clerical error contained in defendant's judgment of conviction with a nunc pro tunc entry indicating that he had been convicted following a jury trial, not, as the entry stated, upon guilty pleas.