State v. Lowry, Unpublished Decision (12-8-2003)
State v. Lowry, Unpublished Decision (12-8-2003)
Opinion of the Court
{¶ 2} On December 11, 2002, appellant was indicted on one count of trafficking in cocaine, a felony of the third degree. On January 27, 2003, appellant, with counsel present, entered a negotiated plea of guilty to the indictment. He was thereupon found guilty and sentenced to a definite term of incarceration of three years. A fine of $5000 was also imposed.
{¶ 3} On February 18, 2003, appellant filed a notice of appeal, and herein raises the following sole Assignment of Error:
{¶ 4} "I. The Appellant's plea of guilty was based upon a negotiated plea, the terms of which was (sic) not stated on the record in open court as required by Criminal Rule 11(F) and resulted in prejudice to appellant."
{¶ 6} Crim.R. 11 sets forth the manner in which a trial court affirmatively determines that a defendant's entry of a plea comports with the constitutional standards set forth under Ohio law. See State v.Stowers (Jan. 31, 1985), Cuyahoga App. No. 48572, citing State v.Billups (1979),
{¶ 7} In the case sub judice, the following discussion, in pertinent part, took place regarding the plea:
{¶ 8} "THE COURT: The only — I've had discussions with Mr. Stergios and the State of Ohio. And the court is going to order that you serve a period of three years in the appropriate state institution. There is a mandatory fine of $5,000 the Court must impose by statute. So your sentence is going to be three years in the appropriate state institution, a $5,000 fine. There is not — judicial release is not possible, but whatever the institution does, as far as where they send you, is up to them.
{¶ 9} "Do you understand that's a sentence you're going to receive, with credit for time served in the Stark County Jail?
{¶ 10} "Yes.
{¶ 12} "Ms. Konovsky: Yes, Your Honor.
{¶ 13} "The Court: Agree, Mr. Stergios?
{¶ 14} "Mr. Stergios: Yes, Your Honor." Tr. at 7-9.
{¶ 15} As an initial matter, we must analyze the State's response that appellant cannot appeal from a sentence that is recommended by both parties (i.e., the prosecutor and the defendant) and is authorized by law. See R.C.
{¶ 16} In the case sub judice, appellant entered into a negotiated plea and thereafter failed to attempt to withdraw the plea. As such, we find the rationale of Sumes applicable herein.
{¶ 17} Appellant's sole Assignment of Error is therefore overruled.
{¶ 18} For the reasons stated in the foregoing opinion, the judgment of the Court of Common Pleas, Stark County, Ohio, is hereby affirmed.
Wise, J., Hoffman, P.J., and Boggins, J., concur.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.