recognizing that it was plain error to sentence defendant for Grand Theft and Medicaid Fraud where the two offenses were allied offenses of similar import
How later courts described this case
- recognizing that it was plain error to sentence defendant for Grand Theft and Medicaid Fraud where the two offenses were allied offenses of similar import
- finding same -5- Clinton CA2025-03-008 postrelease control notifications and requirements mandatory sentencing provisions in previous statutory scheme
- noting in this context that, “even when the sentences are to be served concurrently, a defendant is prejudiced by having more convictions than are authorized by law”
- noting that "sentences that do not comport with mandatory provisions are subject to total resentencing"
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
O’Connor, J.,
concurring.
{¶ 34} I concur in the conclusion that R.C. 2953.08(D)(1) does not bar appellate review of a sentence that has been jointly recommended by the parties and imposed by the court when the sentence includes convictions for offenses that are allied offenses of similar import.
{¶ 35} I write separately, however, to emphasize my view that allied offenses are merged at sentencing solely for the purpose of sentencing.
Moyer, C.J., concurs in the foregoing opinion.