Background
Ariel Bush was indicted on drug-trafficking and related charges. On the scheduled trial date, he agreed to plead guilty to engaging in a pattern of corrupt activity, trafficking in a fentanyl-related compound, and having weapons while under disability. The parties jointly recommended consecutive terms totaling 20 to 25½ years, including an 8-to-12-year term for the trafficking count.
Count 4 alleged trafficking in at least 100 grams of a fentanyl-related compound. Under Ohio law, that quantity made Bush a major drug offender and required a mandatory maximum first-degree-felony sentence of 11 to 16½ years. The trial court nevertheless imposed the jointly recommended 8-to-12-year term on that count.
The Court’s Holding
The Second District held that the Count 4 sentence was contrary to law. Because the indictment charged trafficking in at least 100 grams of a fentanyl-related compound, the trial court was required to impose a mandatory 11-to-16½-year indefinite term. A jointly recommended sentence is insulated from appellate review only when it is authorized by law, and this one was not.
The court also held that Bush’s guilty pleas were not knowing and voluntary. Bush entered the pleas based in part on the promise of an illegal 8-to-12-year Count 4 sentence, and neither the plea form nor the colloquy informed him that the maximum sentence was mandatory. The court reversed the judgment, vacated the pleas, and remanded for further proceedings. Bush’s other challenges were moot.
Key Takeaways
- A plea agreement cannot validly promise a sentence prohibited by a mandatory sentencing statute.
- For trafficking at least 100 grams of a fentanyl-related compound, Ohio law required the mandatory maximum 11-to-16½-year term.
- An illegal sentencing promise can render guilty pleas unknowing and involuntary, requiring the pleas to be vacated rather than merely resentencing the defendant.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores that parties and trial courts cannot use a joint sentencing recommendation to depart from mandatory statutory penalties. When an unlawful term is a material inducement for a guilty plea, the proper remedy may be to undo the plea agreement and begin again.