Background
Austin Cleveland and a codefendant were charged after an encounter involving a vehicle the victim had sold them and was attempting to repossess for nonpayment. According to the State’s representations at sentencing, Cleveland and the codefendant followed the victim as he drove away, Cleveland fired at him, and Cleveland later chased the victim, knocked him down, and took his wallet and car keys.
As part of a package plea, Cleveland pleaded guilty to felonious assault and discharging a firearm on or near prohibited premises, each carrying a one-year firearm specification. The remaining charges and the longer firearm specifications were dismissed. The trial court imposed a stated prison term of four to five years, which included two mandatory years for the firearm specifications—one year for each specification, served consecutively to one another and to the terms for the underlying offenses.
The Court’s Holding
The Eighth District affirmed. Although Cleveland had not objected at sentencing on double-jeopardy grounds, the court exercised its discretion to consider his constitutional argument and rejected it under binding precedent interpreting R.C. 2929.14(B)(1)(g).
The court held that because Cleveland pleaded guilty to two felonies, one of which was felonious assault, and to firearm specifications attached to both felonies, the statute required a prison term for each of the two most serious specifications. Relying on State v. Bollar, the court rejected Cleveland’s argument that separate terms were improper because both specifications were identical one-year specifications arising from possession of the same firearm.
Key Takeaways
- R.C. 2929.14(B)(1)(g) requires terms for the two most serious firearm specifications when its statutory conditions are met.
- The requirement applies even when the two firearm specifications carry identical one-year terms.
- The appellate court considered the unpreserved constitutional challenge but found no basis to depart from binding Ohio Supreme Court precedent.
Why It Matters
The decision reinforces that Ohio courts must impose separate terms for the two most serious qualifying firearm specifications when a defendant pleads guilty to multiple felonies, at least one is enumerated in R.C. 2929.14(B)(1)(g), and multiple qualifying specifications accompany the offenses. Identical specification lengths do not avoid the statute’s mandatory operation.