State v. Pierce

Citations

• 2017 Ohio 9058

Syllabus

The trial court overruled Defendant-appellant's motion for resentencing under Crim.R. 52(B), his motion for a modification of the order directing him to pay court costs, and his motion for resentencing under R.C. 2967.28. The trial court, in both the original and nunc pro tunc termination entries, properly set forth Defendant-appellant's post-release control obligations under R.C. 2967.28. Defendant's motion for relief under Crim.R. 52 seeks resentencing based upon the trial court's proposed failure to merge allied offenses of similar import. Defendant's merger argument is barred by the doctrine of res judicata. Finally, the trial court appropriately overruled Defendant's motion regarding his payment of court costs. Judgment affirmed.