Skip to main content

State v. Terry

Citations

  • 2025 Ohio 5520

Syllabus

Finalized judgment of conviction; criminal sentence; final order; increased sentence; harsher sentence; due-process rights; defendant present at criminal proceedings; record affirmatively indicates defendant's absence; defense counsel's opportunity to object. During the sentencing hearing, the trial court imposed a sentence on the defendant-appellant, remanded the defendant-appellant, and after a recess, unexpectedly resumed the hearing and increased the sentence on one conviction by one year. The initial sentence — a proclamation in open court — was not a final order because it had not been journalized. Defense counsel conceded the new sentence complied with the statutory requirements and the new sentence was supported by the facts. Thus, we cannot say that the trial court's subsequent change in the defendant-appellant's felonious-assault sentence was clearly and convincingly not supported by the record. Additionally, the defendant-appellant's due-process rights were not violated because the record did not affirmatively indicate he was absent when the trial court imposed the harsher sentence, and defense counsel was present and objected to the increased sentence.

Judges: Klatt

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cites

5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

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.