State v. Ohio

Citations

• 2019 Ohio 790

Syllabus

State v. Thomas, App. No. 107116 Rape postrelease control sentence. The record reflects the trial court considered R.C. 2929.11 and R.C. 2929.12 and placed great weight on the seriousness of appellant's conduct. Just because the trial court did not agree with appellant's argument for a less severe sentence does not mean the trial court did not consider all the relevant factors. R.C. 2953.08 does not require more, and therefore, appellant's eight year prison sentence is not \contrary to law.\ Appellant argues the imposition of postrelease control violated Ex Post Facto Clause. At the time of appellant's offense in 1993, a defendant convicted of rape was subject to an indefinite term of a minimum of five to ten years and a maximum of 25 years and such a defendant was to be supervised by the parole board for up to 25 years after serving his prison term. Under the pre S.B. 2 law, Thomas was originally sentenced to a minimum of eight years and a maximum of 25 years. Appellant's Ex Post Facto Clause claim disregards the fact that under a pre S.B. 2 sentence, after his release from prison he would be under parole supervision for up to 25 years. With his new sentence under H.B. 86, after he serves 11 years, he will be subject to only five years of postrelease control. Therefore, appellant's Ex Post Facto argument lacks merit.