State v. McClinton, Unpublished Decision (5-17-2000)
State v. McClinton, Unpublished Decision (5-17-2000)
Opinion of the Court
Appellant was indicted on four counts: (1) receiving stolen property, in violation of R.C.
Crim.R. 32(C) requires a trial court to set forth the verdict or its findings as to each and every charge prosecuted against an accused. Failure to do so renders the judgment substantially deficient, and simply interlocutory. Akron v. Smith (Feb. 9, 2000), Summit App. No. 19517, unreported; State v. Deshich (Feb. 2, 2000), Medina App. No. 2952-M, unreported.
In the present case, the trial court's April 19, 2000 entry reads:
Verdict: We, the jury find the Defendant Guilty of Receiving Stolen Property as charged in Count No. 1 of the Indictment with a value of less than $500.00; We, the jury find the Defendant Guilty of Illegal Use of Food Stamps as charged in Count No. 3 of the Indictment, with a value of less than $500.00. Counts 2 and 4 dismissed by the Court. See sentencing entry.
The sentencing entry reflects that on count three appellant had been found guilty of the illegal use of food stamps in "violation of [R.C.]
2913.45 ." However, the illegal use of food stamps is a violation of R.C.2913.46 . Further, the court sentenced appellant on count two, which had been dismissed, and failed to sentence appellant on count three. Therefore, because the court failed to dispose of count three the entry is not a final appealable order.
Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
Immediately upon the filing hereof, this document shall constitute the journal entry of judgment, and it shall be file stamped by the Clerk of the Court of Appeals at which time the period for review shall begin to run. App.R. 22(E).
Costs taxed to Appellant.
Exceptions.
___________________________ DONNA J. CARR
SLABY, P.J., WHITMORE, J., CONCUR.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.