State v. Rice

Citations

• 2020 Ohio 4404

Syllabus

Although the trial court did not announce its allied-offenses determination at appellant's sentencing hearing, it is apparent from the record that the trial court found appellant's robbery and burglary offenses were not allied offenses that merged for sentencing. Because appellant's robbery and burglary offenses did not arise from the same conduct and involved separate identifiable harm, the trial court correctly determined that those offenses were not allied offenses, and therefore it did not err in failing to merge the offenses at sentencing. The trial court also did not err in imposing consecutive sentences, as it made the required consecutive-sentences findings at the sentencing hearing and in the sentencing entry, and those findings were not unsupported by the record. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by excluding certain public service records from being admitted into evidence at trial. Judgment affirmed.