State v.Simmons
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[Cite as State v.Simmons, 2010-Ohio-2378.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT LUCAS COUNTY State of Ohio Appellee Court of Appeals No. L-09-1006 Trial Court No. CR-200802492 v. Terrance Simmons Appellant DECISION AND JUDGMENT Decided: May 28, 2010 ***** Julia R. Bates, Lucas County Prosecuting Attorney, and Jeffrey D. Lingo, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. Ann M. Baronas, for appellant. ***** HANDWORK, J. {¶ 1} This is an appeal from a sentence imposed by the Lucas County Court of Common Pleas. Pursuant to 6th Dist.Loc.App.R. 12(A), this cause assigned to this court's accelerated calendar. {¶ 2} On December 19, 2008, appellant, Terrance Simmons, entered a plea of no contest to one count of kidnapping in violation of R.C. 2905.01(A) and (C), a felony of the first degree, and to one count of attempted rape in violation of R.C. 2923.02 and 2907.01(A)(2) and (B). He was found guilty on both counts by the common pleas court. On January 6, 2009, the lower court sentenced appellant to seven years in prison for the conviction on the count of kidnapping and to a mandatory eight years in prison on the count of attempted rape. The court further ordered that the two sentences be served consecutively. Appellant sets forth the following assignment of error: {¶ 3} "The trial court erred in sentencing appellant to consecutive sentences." {¶ 4} Appellant contends that the United States Supreme Court's decision in Oregon v. Ice (2009), 129 S.Ct. 711, resurrected the requirement that a trial court make certain factual findings when imposing consecutive sentences on a defendant. This court has previously addressed this issue and determined that it lacked merit. See State v. Finn, 6th Dist.Nos. L-09-1162, L-09-1163, 2010-Ohio-2004, ¶ 10, citing State v. Elmore, 122 Ohio St.3d 472, 2009-Ohio-3478, ¶ 8 (decided after Oregon v. Ice, supra, and reiterates that, pursuant to State v. Foster, 109 Ohio St.3d 1, 2006-Ohio-856, a trial court is not required to make factual findings when imposing consecutive sentences.) See, also, State v. Gaines, 6th Dist. No. WD-08-058, 2010-Ohio-91, ¶ 32. Accordingly, and upon reviewing appellant's sentence under an abuse of discretion standard, see Foster at 2. paragraph four of the syllabus, we find appellant's sole assignment of error not welltaken. {¶ 5} The judgment of the Lucas County Court of Common Pleas is affirmed. Appellant is ordered to pay the costs of this appeal pursuant to App.R. 24(A). JUDGMENT AFFIRMED. A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to App.R. 27. See, also, 6th Dist.Loc.App.R. 4. Peter M. Handwork, J. ____________________________ JUDGE Arlene Singer, J. Thomas J. Osowik, P.J. CONCUR. ____________________________ JUDGE ____________________________ JUDGE This decision is subject to further editing by the Supreme Court of Ohio's Reporter of Decisions. Parties interested in viewing the final reported version are advised to visit the Ohio Supreme Court's web site at: http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/?source=6. 3.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
