Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 2953.08

Section 2953.08(G)(2)(b) permits reversal of a felony financial sanction when the appellate court clearly and convincingly finds it contrary to law.

State v. Strange · filed 2023-02-17(G)(2)(b)

“In reviewing a trial court's imposition of a financial sanction, we apply the standard set forth in R.C. 2953.08(G)(2)(b), inquiring whether the imposition of the ... financial sanction is clearly and convincingly contrary to law.” ... Therefore, Strange has failed to meet her burden of establishing that the trial court's imposition of a $250 fine was clearly and convincingly contrary to law.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) requires an appellate court reviewing a financial sanction to find clearly and convincingly that the sanction is contrary to law.

State v. Allen · filed 2025-05-27(G)(2)

The scope of an appellate court’s ability to review the imposition of a financial sanction is defined by R.C. 2953.08(G)(2), i.e., whether the court clearly and ... convincingly finds that the financial sanction is “otherwise contrary to law.”

Section 2953.08(G)(2)(b) permits an appellate court to modify a felony sentence if it clearly and convincingly finds the sentence contrary to law.

State v. Howard · filed 2022-04-21(G)(2)(b)

In reviewing a trial court’s imposition of a mandatory fine in a felony- sentencing case, we apply the standard set forth in R.C. 2953.08(G)(2)(b), which ... provides that an appellate court may increase, reduce, or otherwise modify a sentence if it clearly and convincingly finds that the sentence is contrary to law.

Section 2953.08 does not give the State an appeal of right from a sentence modification granting judicial release for a third-degree felony.

State v. Newson · filed 2014-09-08(B)(2), (B)(3)

This Court is compelled, however, to dismiss the State’s appeal as it has no appeal of right from the court’s granting of judicial release since Mr. Newson’s case involves a third-degree felony. Revised Code Section 2953.08(B)(2) authorizes an appeal of right from a sentence that is contrary to law while Section 2953.08(B)(3) grants the State an appeal of right from any “sentence [that] is a modification under section 2929.20 of the Revised Code of a sentence that was imposed for a felony of the first or second degree.”

Section 2953.08(B)(3) allows the state to appeal an order granting judicial release only when the offender was convicted of a first- or second-degree felony.

State v. Jennings, Unpublished Decision (5-21-2002) · filed 2002-05-21(B)(3)

The legislature has authorized the state to appeal only from an order granting judicial release to an offender who has been convicted of a felony of the first or second degree. See R.C. 2953.08 (B)(3). In other instances, the state does not have a right to appeal from an order granting judicial release. Id.

Section 2953.08(B)(3) gives the state a right to appeal judicial release for first and second degree felonies, but not for third, fourth or fifth degree felonies.

State v. Cunningham, Unpublished Decision (7-28-2005) · filed 2005-07-28(B)(3)

When the legislature "expressed" first and second degree felonies as appealable in terms of judicial release in R.C. 2953.08 (B)(3), it excluded all other degrees of felonies from within this statutory right to appeal.

Section 2953.08(B)(2) does not authorize a prosecutor to appeal an order granting judicial release for a third-, fourth-, or fifth-degree felony.

State v. Fox, 87821 (8-2-2007) · filed 2007-08-02(B)(2)

However, subsequent to the state filing the instant appeal, the Ohio Supreme Court decided State v. Cunningham , 113 Ohio St.3d 108 , 2007-Ohio-1245 , which holds that "R.C. 2953.08 (B)(2) does not authorize a prosecuting attorney to appeal the modification of a sentence granting judicial release for a felony of the third, fourth, or fifth degree." ... Accordingly, as we are without jurisdiction to hear the case at hand, the state's appeal is dismissed.

Section 2953.08(B) does not permit the state to appeal a grant of judicial release to an offender convicted of a third-, fourth-, or fifth-degree felony.

State v. Sparks · filed 2008-09-08(B)

However, R.C. 2953.08 (B) does not permit the state to appeal the trial court's decision to grant judicial release to an offender convicted of a third-, fourth-, or fifth-degree felony.

Section 2953.08(B)(3) permits the state to appeal a judicial-release sentence modification only for a first- or second-degree felony.

State v. Shipman · filed 2012-05-29(B)(3)

We note although appellant has a right to appeal a sentence that is contrary to law under R.C. 2953.08(B)(2), subsection (B)(3) permits appeals to a sentence modification under R.C. 2729.20 (judicial release) for felonies of first and second degrees only. This case involved a sentence modification on a felony of the third degree. ... Based upon Cunningham, we hereby grant appellee's motion to dismiss.

Section 2953.08(B)(3) does not permit the State to appeal an order granting judicial release from a sentence for a third-degree felony.

State v. Mitchell · filed 2014-08-11(B)(3)

Thus, given the limited right of appeal set forth in R.C. 2953.08(B)(3), we conclude that the State is not permitted to bring this appeal given that Mr. Mitchell was convicted of a third-degree felony.

Section 2953.08(B)(2) does not give prosecutors an appeal as of right from a grant of judicial release modifying a sentence for a third-, fourth-, or fifth-degree felony.

State v. Boyer · filed 2017-07-17(B)(2)

The determinative issue before this court is whether the State may appeal the granting of a motion for judicial release for a third-degree felony pursuant to R.C. 2953.08(B)(2). For the following reasons, we hold that it may not and, accordingly, dismiss the appeal.

Section 2953.08(B) does not permit the state to appeal a judicial release that modifies the sentence of an offender convicted of a third-, fourth-, or fifth-degree felony.

State v. Davis · filed 2018-10-09(B)

Based upon the foregoing, we find the state did not have a right to appeal the trial court’s modification of Appellee’s sentence.

A guilty plea does not prevent a direct appeal arguing that a sentence was unauthorized by law or inconsistent with a jointly recommended sentence.

State ex rel. Roush v. Hickson · filed 2024-10-02(D)(1)

Roush’s guilty plea would not have precluded him from arguing on direct appeal that his sentence was not authorized by law or was inconsistent with the jointly recommended sentence.

Section 2953.08(D) limits sentence appeals under subsection (A) but does not bar other grounds of appeal under section 2953.02.

State v. Lentz, Unpublished Decision (2-28-2003) · filed 2003-02-28(D)

The limiting effects of R.C. 2953.08 (D) apply only to grounds set out in R.C. 2953.08 (A) that a defendant asserts with respect to his sentence. Those terms do not apply to any other grounds a defendant may assert on an appeal taken pursuant to R.C. 2953.02 .

Section 2953.08(G)(2) permits an appellate court to modify or vacate only a sentence appealed under that section, leaving unappealed sentences on other counts intact.

State v. Flynn, Unpublished Decision (6-5-2006) · filed 2006-06-05(G)(2)

Relying on App.R. 12(A)(1)(b), which mandates an appellate court to "determine the appeal on its merits on the assignments of error," and R.C. 2953.08 (G)(2), which allows an appellate court only to modify or vacate a sentence appealed under that section, the supreme court found that the appellate court exceeded its authority by considering an assignment of error not raised and vacating a sentence not appealed. ... Consequently, the judgment sentencing appellant on the remaining counts is upheld.

Section 2953.08(G) bars appellate consideration of individual prison terms when the appellant challenges only whether the terms run consecutively.

State v. Goodell, Unpublished Decision (6-30-2006) · filed 2006-06-30(G)

When his appeal was reopened, appellant only raised error with respect to the consecutive aspect of his total term of incarceration, and did not raise error with respect to the separate terms of incarceration for each offense. Thus, any error or argument with respect to the terms imposed for each conviction was waived by him, was barred from our consideration, id. at ¶ 30, R.C. 2953.08 (G), and barred from reconsideration by the sentencing judge by res judicata.

Section 2953.08(D) does not require a trial court to advise a defendant of its bar to appellate review before imposing a jointly recommended sentence within the statutory range.

State v. Robinson, 89222 (1-24-2008) · filed 2008-01-24(D)

First, a trial court is not required to advise a defendant of the R.C. 2953.08 (D) bar to appellate review before it imposes a jointly recommended sentence that falls within the statutory range of available sentences.

Section 2953.08 permits an appeal from a sentence contrary to law, and a defendant cannot waive that right when the sentence is void.

State v. Middleton · filed 2013-12-19(A)(4), (D)(1)

However, a defendant cannot waive a right to appeal a sentence that is contrary to law.

Section 2953.08(D)(1)'s limit on sentence review cannot be circumvented through a collateral attack on grounds that could have been raised on direct appeal.

State v. Guiley · filed 2014-05-12(D)(1)

However, to allow a defendant to collaterally attack a judgment on grounds he could have raised on direct appeal if they had not barred by R.C. 2953.08(D)(1) would render that statute a nullity.

Section 2953.08 does not bar appellate review of the validity of a guilty plea leading to an agreed sentence because the section addresses sentencing.

State v. Howland · filed 2018-02-12(D)

However, because Howland is arguing that the trial court did not comply with Crim.R. 11 in accepting his guilty plea, R.C. 2953.08, which addresses sentencing is not controlling.

Section 2953.08(D)(1) bars review of an agreed sentence that is authorized by law and imposed by the sentencing judge.

State v. Billiter · filed 2018-02-27(D)(1)

Regardless of the fact that Billiter breached the plea agreement, Billiter is in essence appealing his sentence, which he cannot do pursuant to R.C. 2953.08(D)(1). His sentence is not reviewable because it was an agreed sentence.

Section 2953.08(G)(2)(b) permits an appellate court that finds a sentence clearly and convincingly contrary to law to remand for resentencing limited to the proper imposition of postrelease control.

State v. Bolan · filed 2024-07-11(G)(2)(b)

R.C. 2953.08(G)(2)(b) permits an appellate court, upon finding that a sentence is clearly and convincingly contrary to law, to remand for resentencing “‘limited to the proper imposition of postrelease control.’”

Section 2953.08(G)(1) requires remand for required findings, including findings previously approved on appeal, but does not define the full scope of the resentencing hearing.

State v. Diaz, Unpublished Decision (7-29-2004) · filed 2004-07-29(G)(1)

Second, the statute does not distinguish between approved and defective findings. Rather the statute requires the case be remanded for "required findings," which would include even those previously approved on appellate review. This statute simply does not address, much less explain, the nature and full extent of a resentencing hearing.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) permits an appellate court to modify or vacate only a sentence that was appealed, even when another sentence in the same case is erroneous.

State v. Saxon · filed 2006-03-20(G)(2)

App.R. 12(A)(1)(b) mandates that an appellate court “[d]etermine the appeal on its merits on the assignments of error,” and R.C. 2953.08(G)(2) permits the court to modify or vacate only a sentence appealed under that section. In this case, the appellate court exceeded its authority by essentially considering an assignment of error not raised and vacating a sentence not appealed. An appellate court may modify or vacate only a sentence that is appealed by the defendant and may not modify or vacate the entire multiple-offense sentence based upon an appealed error in the sentence for a single offense.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) allows an appellate court to modify or vacate only a sentence the defendant appealed.

State v. Johnson, Unpublished Decision (4-17-2006) · filed 2006-04-17(G)(2)

Relying on App.R. 12(A)(1)(b), which mandates an appellate court to "determine the appeal on its merits on the assignments of error," and R.C. 2953.08 (G)(2), which allows an appellate court only to modify or vacate a sentence appealed under that section, the supreme court found that the appellate court exceeded its authority by considering an assignment of error not raised and vacating a sentence not appealed. The supreme court thus held that an "appellate court may only modify or vacate a sentence that is appealed by the defendant and may not modify or vacate the entire multiple-offense sentence based upon an appealed error in the sentence for a single offense." Saxon at ¶ 30. The judgment sentencing appellant to nonminimum prison terms on the three felonies is, accordingly, upheld.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) bars resentencing on remand for sentences that were not appealed.

State v. King, 07ap-230 (10-9-2007) · filed 2007-10-09(G)(2)

Both cases indicate R.C. 2953.08 (G)(2) by implication at least bars a resentencing for sentences which were not appealed.

Section 2953.08(B) does not give the prosecution an appeal as of right from a juvenile court’s discretionary refusal to impose a serious youthful offender blended sentence.

In re C.W. · filed 2016-07-05(B)

Therefore, the trial court's decision to not impose a serious youthful offender blended sentence at disposition does not fall under R.C. 2945.67 of R.C. 2953.08(B).

Section 2953.08(B) permits a prosecutor to appeal a felony sentence only on its listed grounds; when the first and third grounds do not apply, the remaining ground is that the sentence is contrary to law.

State v. Bradley, Unpublished Decision (2-22-2005) · filed 2005-02-22(B)

This court notes that the since the charges in this case are fifth degree felonies, no presumption arises that a prison sentence is appropriate. Thus, the first basis for a prosecutor's appeal does not apply. The original indictment was for fifth degree felonies, so the third basis does not apply. Thus the only basis remaining for appeal is that the sentence is contrary to law.

Section 2953.08(B) does not allow the state to appeal a felony sentence merely because the trial court gave insufficient weight to sentencing factors.

State v. Terry, Unpublished Decision (3-22-2007) · filed 2007-03-22(B)

At best, the state claims that the court failed to give sufficient weight to two factors. This is not a matter appealable by the state under R.C. 2953.08 (B).

Section 2953.08(B)(2) does not authorize a prosecuting attorney to appeal a sentence modification granting judicial release for a third-, fourth-, or fifth-degree felony.

State v. Cunningham · filed 2007-04-04(B)(2)

{¶ 28} Accordingly, R.C. 2953.08(B)(2) does not authorize a prosecuting attorney to appeal the modification of a sentence granting judicial release for a felony of the third, fourth, or fifth degree.

Section 2953.08(B)(2) permits the state to appeal a felony sentence when its challenge raises a legal question about whether the sentence is contrary to law.

State v. Caldwell · filed 2011-08-30(B)(2)

Appellee challenges the state's right to appeal a sentence. We disagree with appellee's argument. ... We find appellant's challenge is to the legal issue of whether participation in the VOA program legally qualifies as confinement for jail time credit and therefore the issue is proper for appeal.

Section 2953.08(A)(4) allows a defendant to appeal a sentence as contrary to law, including a prison sentence imposed when prison is presumed.

State v. Stephens · filed 2019-08-05(A)(4)

While it is accurate that there is no specific affirmative right provided to allow for an appeal of a prison sentence when there is a presumption for such a sentence, R.C. 2953.08(A)(4) generally allows a defendant to appeal any sentence that “is contrary to law.”

Section 2953.08(G)(2) requires explicit sentencing findings only in the specific circumstances it identifies.

State v. Vantilburg · filed 2017-06-29(G)(2)

While R.C. 2953.08(G)(2) does mandate that a trial court make explicit findings on the record under certain circumstances, for instance, when ordering consecutive sentences pursuant to 2929.14(C)(4), it is equally clear that this section limits this requirement only to those specific instances.

Section 2953.08(G)(1) provides for remand when the sentencing court has not stated required findings on the record.

State v. Wittenberg · filed 2017-02-23(G)(1)

We vacate the sentence and remand this case to the trial court to resentence appellee and state on the record the required findings pursuant to R.C. 2953.08(G)(1).

Section 2953.08(G)(1)’s requirement that findings be stated on the record is broader than a requirement to speak them aloud at sentencing.

State v. Bordner, Unpublished Decision (3-23-2005) · filed 2005-03-23(G)(1)

Furthermore, we recognize a difference between the broadly stated on the record, as used in R.C. 2953.08 (G)(1), and the particular spoken aloud at sentencing, as conceived by Comer, at ¶ 20.

Section 2953.08(G)(1) requires an appellate court to remand when a sentencing court fails to state required judicial-release findings on the record.

State v. Triplett · filed 2008-02-05(G)(1)

Thus, under R.C. 2953.08(G)(1): If the sentencing court was required to make the findings required by * * * division (H) of section 2929.20 of the Revised Code * * *, and if the sentencing court failed to state the required findings on the record, the court hearing an appeal * * * shall remand the case to the sentencing court and instruct the sentencing court to state, on the record, the required findings.

Section 2953.08(G)(1) requires remand when a sentencing court fails to state required findings for a downward departure from a presumptive prison term.

State v. Zione, Ca2008-08-032 (3-30-2009) · filed 2009-03-30(G)(1)

The sentencing statute of R.C. 2953.08 (G)(1), states: "If the sentencing court was required to make the findings required by division (B) or (D) of section 2929.13 , * * * relative to the imposition or modification of the sentence, and if the sentencing court failed to state the required findings on the record, the court hearing an appeal under division (A), (B), or (C) of this section shall remand the case to the sentencing court and instruct the sentencing court to state, on the record, the required findings." ... {¶ 15} Appellee's sentence is reversed and this cause remanded to the trial court for resentencing in accordance with the law and consistent with this Opinion.

Section 2953.08(G)(1) requires remand when a sentencing court fails to state required findings under section 2929.13(B) on the record.

State v. Alicea · filed 2018-09-04(G)(1)

However, when read in conjunction with R.C. 2953.08(G)(1), it is clear that findings are required.

Section 2953.08(G)(1) requires an appellate court to remand when a sentencing court omits required downward-departure findings, so the sentencing court can state them on the record.

State v. Hall · filed 2026-06-11(G)(1)

Where the sentencing court imposes a downward departure and fails to make the R.C. 2929.13(D)(2)(a) and (b) findings, on appeal the court “shall remand the case to the sentencing court and instruct the sentencing court to state, on the record, the required findings.” R.C. 2953.08(G)(1); Mathis, at paragraph two of the syllabus.

Section 2953.08(G)(1) requires an appellate court to remand for the sentencing court to state required consecutive-sentence findings when those findings were omitted.

State v. Gilcreast · filed 2015-11-18(G)(1)

R.C. 2953.08(G)(1) was a statute in effect at that time which “deal[t] with the specific situation where a trial court is required to make findings [pursuant to] R.C. 2929.14(E)(4), and fail[ed] to state the required findings on the record. That statute * * * provide[d] that the appropriate relief on appeal [was] to remand the case to the sentencing court and instruct the sentencing court to state, on the record, the required findings.”

Section 2953.08(G)(1) requires an appellate court to remand when required sentencing findings are missing from the record.

State v. Oller · filed 2017-03-07(G)(1)

In addition, R.C. 2953.08(G)(1) requires the trial court to "state the findings of the trier of fact required by division (B)(2)(e) of section 2929.14 of the Revised Code, relative to the imposition or modification of the sentence, and if the sentencing court failed to state the required findings on the record, the court hearing an appeal * * * shall remand the case to the sentencing court and instruct the sentencing court to state, on the record, the required findings."

Section 2953.08(A)(4) permits a defendant to appeal a felony sentence that is contrary to law but does not authorize a motion to vacate the sentence in the trial court.

State v. Lorenzi, Unpublished Decision (10-27-2005) · filed 2005-10-27(A)(4)

R.C. 2953.08 (A)(4) provides that a defendant who is convicted of or pleads guilty to a felony may appeal as a matter of right the sentence imposed upon the defendant if that sentence is contrary to law. The statute, however, contains no provision allowing a defendant to file a motion to vacate his sentence in the trial court.

Section 2953.08(G) no longer applies insofar as it calls for appellate review of findings required by the severed sentencing provisions.

State v. Foster · filed 2006-02-27(G)

The appellate statute R.C. 2953.08(G), insofar as it refers to the severed sections, no longer applies.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) continues to require clear and convincing evidence to disturb a felony sentence in appeals under the applicable provisions of divisions (A), (B), and (C) after Foster.

State v. Ramos, Unpublished Decision (2-26-2007) · filed 2007-02-26(G)(2)

Accordingly, the clear and convincing evidence standard of review set forth under R.C. 2953.08 (G)(2) remains viable with respect to those cases appealed under the applicable provisions of R.C. 2953.08 (A), (B), and (C), including the case sub judice.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) remains effective after Foster for sentencing provisions that Foster did not sever.

State v. Torok, 2007-A-0001 (2-22-2008) · filed 2008-02-22(G)(2)

However, we cannot agree with those courts holding that the appellate sentencing statute, R.C. 2953.08 (G)(2), is entirely dead. ... Foster merely removed its application to the severed sections of the statutory sentencing structure.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) remains effective after Foster, but does not apply to the sentencing provisions Foster severed.

State v. Allen, 2007-G-2768 (3-28-2008) · filed 2008-03-28(G)(2)

However, we cannot agree with those courts holding that the appellate sentencing statute, R.C. 2953.08 (G)(2), is entirely dead. ... Foster merely removed its application to the severed sections of the statutory sentencing structure.

Section 2953.08 does not apply to misdemeanor convictions.

Conneaut v. Fromknecht · filed 2024-03-25

However, R.C. 2953.08 and case law relevant to felony sentencing do not apply to misdemeanor convictions.

Section 2953.08(G) does not govern misdemeanor sentences.

State v. Downie · filed 2009-08-28(G)

Because that statute does not govern misdemeanor sentences, appellant’s reliance upon R.C. 2953.08(G) is misplaced.

Section 2953.08 applies to felony sentences, not misdemeanor sentences.

State v. Jones · filed 2017-02-03

Appellant urges the court to apply a “clear and convincing” standard of review, as set forth under R.C. 2953.08. That statute is applicable to felony, not misdemeanor sentences. Appellant’s misdemeanor sentence is reviewed under an abuse of discretion standard.

Section 2953.08 does not apply to appeals involving misdemeanor convictions.

State v. Fromknecht · filed 2023-12-18

Contrary to the assertions in the assignment of error, Fromknecht’s convictions are misdemeanor convictions to which R.C. 2953.08 and case law relevant to felony sentencing does not apply.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) permits an appellate court to modify or vacate a sentence contrary to law, but a challenge to an expired portion is moot when relief would have no effect.

State v. Wright · filed 2011-07-21(G)(2)

While R.C. 2953.08(G)(2) provides that this court may “increase, reduce or otherwise modify a sentence * * * or may vacate the sentence and remand the matter to the sentencing court for resentencing” upon finding it contrary to law, that part of appellant’s sentence that is contrary to law has expired. Any remedy granted by this court would have no effect. Therefore, the trial court’s error in suspending appellant’s drivers license is moot.

Section 2953.08(B) does not authorize the state to appeal a referral to pretrial diversion as a matter of right because the referral does not impose a sentence.

State v. Bales · filed 2011-10-17(B)

Under R.C. 2953.08(B), the state may appeal as a matter of right “a sentence imposed upon a defendant[.]” R.C. 2953.08(B) does not authorize the state to appeal the trial court’s November 12, 2010 entries, because those entries do not impose a sentence.

Section 2953.08(B)'s sentencing appeal provision does not cover an order terminating postrelease control.

State v. Thurman · filed 2016-05-19(B)

And finally, the termination of postrelease control does not implicate a sentencing appeal pursuant to R.C. 2953.08(B).

Section 2953.08(G)(2) limits appellate review of a judicial-release sentence modification to whether the record supports the required findings; it does not permit review of whether the modification is contrary to law.

State v. Belcher · filed 2017-07-24(G)(2)

An appellate court's authority to "increase, reduce, or otherwise modify" the modification of a sentence pursuant to R.C. 2929.20 is limited by R.C. 2953.08(G)(2)(a) to whether the findings for the modification are supported by the record. By contrast, R.C. 2953.08(G)(2)(b) has no application to sentence modifications and is plainly restricted to a "sentence" (i.e., the original sentence). Therefore, without regard to the degree of the felony for which an original sentence was imposed, R.C. 2953.08(G)(2)(b) does not permit an appellate court to "increase, reduce, or otherwise modify" a sentence modification as contrary to law.

Section 2953.08(A)(4) provides no right to appeal a sentence modification.

State v. Crossty · filed 2016-06-03(A)(4)

Moreover, R.C. 2953.08(A)(4) affords no right to appeal the modification of a sentence.

Section 2953.08(D)(3) bars appellate review of sentences for aggravated murder or murder imposed under R.C. 2929.02 to 2929.06, and that bar does not violate equal protection.

State v. Burke · filed 2016-12-16(D)(3)

Accordingly, R.C. 2953.08(D)(3) does not violate the Equal Protection Clause.

Section 2953.08(D)(3)’s limit on review of aggravated murder and murder sentences does not violate federal or Ohio equal protection guarantees.

State v. Blouir · filed 2022-04-13(D)(3)

As such, R.C. 2953.08(D)(3) does not violate the Equal Protection Clauses of the United States or Ohio Constitutions.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) directs appellate review of a maximum sentence under the “otherwise contrary to law” provision when the specific findings listed in (G)(2)(a) are not required.

State v. Dawson · filed 2018-03-23(G)(2)

Because maximum sentences do not require specific findings referenced in R.C. 2953.08(G)(2)(a), we focus on subpart (b) of that section to determine if the sentence is otherwise contrary to law.

Section 2953.08(A)(1) permits an appeal from a maximum sentence imposed for one offense.

State v. Williams · filed 2019-04-11(A)(1)

Under R.C. 2953.08(A)(1), maximum sentences imposed for one offense are appealable.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) directs appellate review of a maximum sentence toward whether the sentence is contrary to law when the sentence requires none of the findings listed in division (G)(2)(a).

State v. Osei · filed 2019-08-14(G)(2)

“Maximum sentences do not require specific findings referenced in R.C. 2953.08(G)(2)(a), thus [on review] our focus is * * * to determine if the sentence is otherwise contrary to law” by determining whether the trial court considered the appropriate statutory factors when imposing such a sentence.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) permits review of a maximum felony prison term for whether it is contrary to law; a term within the statutory range is lawful when the sentencing court considers the required sentencing factors.

State v. Grimes · filed 2021-03-15(G)(2)

A trial court's imposition of a maximum prison term is not contrary to law as long as the court sentences the offender within the statutory range for the offense, and in so doing, considers the purposes and principles of felony sentencing set forth in R.C. 2929.11 and the seriousness and recidivism factors set forth R.C. 2929.12. ... Because appellant’s sentence was within the statutory range and the trial court considered the purposes and principles of felony sentencing set forth in R.C. 2929.11 and the seriousness and recidivism factors set forth R.C. 2929.12, we find that the trial court did not err in imposing the maximum sentence on appellant.

Section 2953.08(G)(2)(b) permits review of whether a felony sentence is contrary to law; a maximum prison term is not contrary to law when it is within the statutory range and the sentencing court considers the required factors.

State v. Hunter · filed 2021-04-22(G)(2)(b)

A trial court's imposition of a maximum prison term is not contrary to law as long as the court sentences the offender within the statutory range for the offense, and in so doing, considers the purposes and principles of felony sentencing set forth in R.C. 2929.11 and the seriousness and recidivism factors set forth R.C. 2929.12.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) permits an appellate court to modify or vacate a felony sentence when it determines by clear and convincing evidence that the sentence is contrary to law.

State v. Thomas · filed 2024-11-21(G)(2)

Under R.C. 2953.08(G)(2), an appellate court “may increase, reduce, or otherwise modify a sentence . . . or may vacate the sentence and remand the matter . . . for resentencing.” Id. However, an appellate court may only take this action “if it determines by clear and convincing evidence . . . that the sentence is otherwise contrary to law.”

Section 2953.08(G)(2) does not permit an appellate court to modify or vacate a felony sentence because it finds insufficient record support for the trial court’s consideration of R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12.

State v. Barr · filed 2023-03-24(G)(2)

R.C. 2953.08(G)(2) does not allow an appellate court to modify or vacate a sentence based on its view that the sentence is not supported by the record pursuant to R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12.

Section 2953.08(G)(2)(b) limits review of a felony sentence in this context to whether the sentence is contrary to law.

State v. King · filed 2023-03-17(G)(2)(b)

Because this case does not involve any of the specific sections listed in R.C. 2953.08(G)(2)(a), this Court need only consider whether King’s sentence is contrary to law under R.C. 2953.08(G)(2)(b).

Section 2953.08(G)(2) does not permit an appellate court to independently reweigh the record to decide which sentence best complies with R.C. 2929.11 and R.C. 2929.12.

State v. Smart · filed 2023-03-23(G)(2)

Nothing in R.C. 2953.08(G)(2) permits this Court to independently weigh the evidence in the record and substitute our own judgment for that of the trial court to determine a sentence which best reflects compliance with R.C. 2929.11 and R.C. 2929.12.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) does not permit an appellate court to vacate a sentence based on its own view that the trial court’s identified factors do not support it under R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12.

State v. Smith · filed 2023-03-02(G)(2)

And if this court were to infer a sentence was contrary to law and vacate it merely because we did not believe the factors the trial court identified supported it, we would in effect be vacating a sentence based on our view that it is not supported by the record under R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12, which is not permitted under R.C. 2953.08(G)(2).

Section 2953.08(G)(2) does not permit an appellate court to independently review a trial court's sentencing findings under R.C. 2929.12 or its adherence to the sentencing purposes in R.C. 2929.11.

State v. Lopez-Cruz · filed 2023-01-30(G)(2)

Accordingly, because there is nothing within R.C. 2953.08(G)(2) that permits this court to conduct an independent review of a trial court's sentencing findings under R.C. 2929.12 or its adherence to the purposes of felony sentencing under R.C. 2929.11, Lopez-Cruz's first argument lacks merit.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) does not permit an appellate court to independently reweigh the evidence and substitute its judgment for the trial court’s when reviewing a felony sentence under R.C. 2929.11 and R.C. 2929.12.

State v. Kreiter · filed 2023-02-01(G)(2)

Nothing in R.C. 2953.08(G)(2) permits this Court to independently weigh the evidence in the record and substitute our own judgment for that of the trial court to determine a sentence which best reflects compliance with R.C. 2929.11 and R.C. 2929.12.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) does not allow an appellate court to reweigh the record and substitute its judgment about whether a sentence complies with R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12.

State v. Henley · filed 2023-02-10(G)(2)

Regardless, as this court has repeatedly held, “R.C. 2953.08(G)(2) does not permit an ‘appellate court to independently weigh the evidence in the record and substitute its judgment for that of the trial court concerning the sentence that best reflects compliance with R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12.’”

Section 2953.08(G)(2) does not authorize an appellate court to independently weigh sentencing factors under R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12.

State v. Hackathorn · filed 2023-02-13(G)(2)

The Court reasoned, “[n]othing in R.C. 2953.08(G)(2) permits an appellate court to independently weigh the evidence in the record and substitute its judgment for that of the trial court concerning the sentence that best reflects compliance with R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12.” Id. at ¶ 42. ... An appellate court is without authority to independently weigh mitigating factors under R.C. 2929.12. Jones, supra, at ¶ 42.

Section 2953.08(G)(2)’s limits on sentence review apply to appeals under (A)(1)(a) involving a maximum sentence for one offense.

State v. Brill · filed 2023-02-13(G)(2)

Having examined the entirety of this statute, we conclude that the Ohio Supreme Court’s interpretation of R.C. 2953.08(G)(2) in Jones is applicable to appeals brought under R.C. 2953.08(A) because R.C. 2953.08(G)(2) is applicable to appeals brought under R.C. 2953.08(A). Thus, Jones is controlling to appeals brought under R.C. 2953.08(A)(1)(a) and is not limited to appeals brought under R.C. 2953.08(A)(4).

Section 2953.08(G)(2)(b) limits appellate review of felony sentences based on R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12 to whether the sentence is contrary to law, rather than whether the record supports it.

State v. Mowery · filed 2023-02-27(G)(2)(b)

When reviewing felony sentences that are imposed solely after applying R.C. 2929.11 and R.C. 2929.12, this Court shall no longer analyze whether those sentences are unsupported by the record. Our task is simply to determine whether those sentences are contrary to law.

Section 2953.08(G)(2)(b) does not permit an appellate court to modify or vacate a sentence merely because it believes the record does not support the sentence under sections 2929.11 and 2929.12.

State v. Ford · filed 2023-02-27(G)(2)(b)

“R.C. 2953.08(G)(2) does not allow an appellate court to modify or vacate a sentence based on its view that the sentence is not supported by the record under R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12.”

Section 2953.08(G)(2) does not allow an appellate court to review whether the record supports a sentence under R.C. 2929.12.

State v. Stearns · filed 2022-11-28(G)(2)

Thus, following precedent, R.C. 2953.08(G)(2) does not allow an appellate court to review whether the record supports the sentence under R.C. 2929.12.

Section 2953.08(G)(2)(b) does not allow an appellate court to modify or vacate a felony sentence based on its view that the record does not support the sentence under R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12.

State v. Johnson · filed 2022-11-28(G)(2)(b)

The appellate review of felony sentences established by R.C. 2953.08(G)(2)(b) “therefore does not provide a basis for an appellate court to modify or vacate a sentence based on its view that the sentence is not supported by the record under R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12.”

Section 2953.08(G)(2)(a) permits review of whether the record supports only the sentencing findings it lists, which do not include findings under sections 2929.11 and 2929.12.

State v. Giffin · filed 2022-12-01(G)(2)(a)

The statutes cited in subdivision (a) of R.C. 2953.08(G)(2) are not relevant to Appellant’s sentence. ... The Supreme Court in Jones decided a reviewing court cannot use subdivision (G)(2)(a) of R.C. 2953.08 to review whether the record supports R.C. 2929.11 or R.C. 2929.12 findings as those statutes are not listed in (G)(2)(a).

Section 2953.08(G)(2)(b) permits review of a sentence allegedly based on impermissible considerations, but not modification or vacatur merely because the sentence lacks support under R.C. 2929.11 or 2929.12.

State v. Brunson · filed 2022-12-05(G)(2)(b)

The appellate court’s jurisdiction to review sentencing factors is limited under R.C. 2953.08(G)(2)(b). Under that statute, the appellate court cannot modify or vacate a sentence based on its view that the sentence is not supported by the record under R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12. Jones at ¶ 39. However, the appellate court is not prohibited from reviewing a sentence “when the claim is that the sentence was improperly imposed based on impermissible considerations.” Bryant at ¶ 22.

Section 2953.08(G)(2)(b) does not permit an appellate court to modify a sentence merely because it finds the record insufficient to support the trial court’s assessment of the R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12 factors.

State v. Chuppa · filed 2022-12-07(G)(2)(b)

Even were we inclined to agree, it would not be our province here to reweigh the facts and “substitute [our] judgment for that of the trial court regarding the appropriate sentence[] * * * under R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12.” Jones at ¶41; see also id. at ¶32 (explaining that “an appellate court’s determination that the record does not support a sentence does not equate to a determination that the sentence is ‘otherwise contrary to law’ as that term is used in R.C. 2953.08(G)(2)(b)”).

Section 2953.08(G)(2) does not permit an appellate court to reweigh sentencing factors and substitute its judgment for the trial court’s.

State v. Miller · filed 2022-12-08(G)(2)

By challenging the adequacy of the trial court’s statutory considerations, Miller is merely asking this court to independently weigh the sentencing factors and substitute our judgment for that of the trial court, which appellate courts are not permitted to do.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) does not permit an appellate court to review whether the record supports a trial court’s racial animus and recidivism findings under section 2929.12.

State v. Dodd · filed 2022-12-08(G)(2)

Dodd essentially asks this court to review the record and determine whether it supports the trial court’s finding of racial animus under R.C. 2929.12(B)(8) and its recidivism finding under R.C. 2929.12(D)(2). Based on Jones, we conclude that R.C. 2953.08(G)(2) does not permit us to conduct this type of review.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) does not permit appellate review of whether the record supports a sentencing court’s finding under R.C. 2929.12(B)(2).

State v. Smith · filed 2022-12-09(G)(2)

Whether the court’s finding under R.C. 2929.12(B)(2) is supported by the record is not subject to appellate review pursuant to R.C. 2953.08(G)(2).

Section 2953.08(G)(2)(a) does not authorize an appellate court to modify or vacate a sentence because the record allegedly lacks support for findings under sections 2929.11 and 2929.12.

State v. Corey · filed 2022-12-19(G)(2)(a)

We reiterate our prior holdings, and admonish all counsel in this district to observe, R.C. 2953.08(G)(2)(a) does not provide a basis for an appellate court to modify or vacate a sentence based on the lack of support in the record for the trial court’s findings under R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) permits an appellate court to reverse or modify a felony sentence only for unsupported findings under the listed provisions or a sentence contrary to law.

State v. Stennett · filed 2022-12-22(G)(2)

Accordingly, under R.C. 2953.08(G)(2), an appellate court may reverse or modify a sentence only if the appellate court clearly and convincingly finds that the record does not support the findings under R.C. 2929.13(B) or (D), 2929.14(B)(2)(e) or (C)(4), or 2929.20(I), or if the sentence is contrary to law.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) does not allow an appellate court to reweigh the evidence and substitute its judgment for the trial court’s when reviewing a felony sentence.

State v. Williams · filed 2022-12-28(G)(2)

Nothing in R.C. 2953.08(G)(2) permits this Court to independently weigh the evidence in the record and substitute our own judgment for that of the trial court to determine a sentence which best reflects compliance with R.C. 2929.11 and R.C. 2929.12.

Section 2953.08(G)(2)(a) permits appellate review of whether the record supports a trial court’s findings under section 2929.13(B) by clear and convincing evidence.

State v. Dobbins · filed 2022-12-29(G)(2)(a)

While R.C. 2953.08(G)(2)(a) permits our review of a trial court’s findings under R.C. 2929.13(B) to determine whether the record supports the sentence by clear and convincing evidence, appellant failed to include a transcript for the sentencing hearing with the record on appeal.

Section 2953.08(G)(2)(a) does not allow an appellate court to modify or vacate a sentence because the record does not support the trial court’s consideration of R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12.

State v. Gibbs · filed 2022-12-30(G)(2)(a)

We reiterate our prior holdings, and admonish all counsel in this district to observe, R.C. 2953.08(G)(2)(a) does not provide a basis for an appellate court to modify or vacate a sentence based on the lack of support in the record for the trial court’s findings under R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12.

Section 2953.08(G)(2)(b) does not permit an appellate court to vacate or modify a sentence because it finds the sentence unsupported by the record under R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12.

State v. Lane · filed 2022-10-24(G)(2)(b)

In Jones, the court held that R.C. 2953.08(G)(2)(b) “does not provide a basis for an appellate court to modify or vacate a sentence based on its view that the sentence is not supported by the record under R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12.” Id. at ¶ 39. ... However, in light of the Supreme Court of Ohio’s holding in Jones, we could not vacate or modify Lane’s sentence on that basis.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) limits appellate review of a felony sentence to its legality, including whether the trial court considered the statutory factors and imposed a sentence within the authorized range.

State v. Booker · filed 2022-09-29(G)(2)

After the Ohio Supreme released its decision in Jones, our review of a sentence imposed by the trial court under R.C. 2953.08(G)(2) is limited to the legality of the sentence, meaning was it imposed after consideration of the statutory factors and is it within the range authorized by the Revised Code.

Section 2953.08(G)(2)(b) does not permit an appellate court to modify or vacate a sentence merely because it finds the record does not support the sentence under R.C. 2929.11 or R.C. 2929.12.

State v. Kaufmann · filed 2022-09-30(G)(2)(b)

In effect, R.C. 2953.08(G)(2)(b) “does not provide a basis for an appellate court to modify or vacate a sentence based on its view that the sentence is not supported by the record under R.C. 2929.11 or R.C. 2929.12.” Jones, supra, at ¶39.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) does not permit an appellate court to reweigh mitigating evidence and substitute its sentencing judgment for the trial court’s.

State v. Holbrook · filed 2022-09-30(G)(2)

However, his arguments fail because he asks this court to independently review the evidence and substitute its judgment for that of the trial court, which we have no authority to do.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) does not permit an appellate court to reverse a felony sentence merely because it independently weighs the sentencing factors differently.

State v. Boyd · filed 2022-09-30(G)(2)

Furthermore, the “otherwise contrary to law” language in the sentencing review statute does not allow the appellate court to reverse by finding “the record does not support the sentence.” Id. at ¶ 38.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) does not allow an appellate court to independently weigh sentencing evidence or substitute its judgment for the trial court’s.

State v. Savage · filed 2022-10-14(G)(2)

R.C. 2953.08(G)(2) does not permit appellate courts to independently weigh the evidence or substitute its judgment for the trial court’s judgment.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) does not authorize appellate review of whether the record supports a sentence challenged under section 2929.12(C)(4).

State v. Stevens · filed 2022-10-24(G)(2)

Thus, when a party makes a challenge that a sentence under R.C. 2929.12(C)(4) is contrary to law because it is not supported by the record, we have no authority to review or modify the sentence because it is not one of the enumerated sentencing statutes that are susceptible to review under the “record does not support” standard.

Section 2953.08(G)(2)(a) does not permit an appellate court to modify or vacate a felony sentence because the record does not support the trial court’s findings under R.C. 2929.11 or 2929.12.

State v. Collins · filed 2022-10-31(G)(2)(a)

As a result, this court may not modify or vacate a felony sentence based on a finding by clear and convincing evidence that the record does not support the trial court’s findings under R.C. 2929.11 or 2929.12.

Section 2953.08(G) does not allow an appellate court to modify or vacate a felony sentence based on its own view that the record fails to support it under sections 2929.11 and 2929.12.

State v. Mueller · filed 2022-11-07(G)

Moreover, our standard of felony sentencing review, as provided in R.C. 2953.08(G), “does not provide a basis for an appellate court to modify or vacate a sentence based on its view that the sentence is not supported by the record under R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12.” State v. Jones, 163 Ohio St.3d 242, 2020-Ohio-6729, 169 N.E.3d 649, ¶ 39.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) does not permit an appellate court to review how the trial court weighed the sentencing factors in R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12.

State v. Schaade · filed 2022-11-14(G)(2)

To the extent Mr. Schaade is challenging the trial court’s application of R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12, we are not permitted to review his sentence in that manner.

Section 2953.08(G)(2)(a) does not permit an appellate court to modify or vacate a felony sentence because the record does not support findings under R.C. 2929.11 or 2929.12.

State v. West · filed 2022-11-14(G)(2)(a)

As a result, this court may not modify or vacate a felony sentence based on a finding by clear and convincing evidence that the record does not support the trial court’s findings under R.C. 2929.11 or 2929.12.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) does not authorize an appellate court to reverse a sentence because the record does not support the trial court’s application of the sentencing factors in sections 2929.11 and 2929.12.

State v. Ohler · filed 2022-11-14(G)(2)

This Court has no authority under R.C. 2953.08(G)(2) to reverse the sentence on the grounds that the record does not support the trial court’s application of R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12.

Section 2953.08(G)(2)(b) does not allow an appellate court to modify or vacate a felony sentence merely because it finds insufficient record support under R.C. 2929.11 or 2929.12.

State v. Blakovich · filed 2022-09-16(G)(2)(b)

We have observed that, “[p]ursuant to Jones, in reviewing an alleged error under R.C. 2929.11 and R.C. 2929.12, [this Court] may no longer evaluate whether sentences are supported by the record.” State v. Murphy, 7th Dist. Mahoning No. 20 MA 0122, 2021-Ohio-4663, ¶ 12. ... Insofar as Appellant relies on the trial court’s consideration of the factors enumerated in R.C. 2929.12, we find that his argument is without merit, and affirm Appellant’s maximum sentence for domestic violence.

Section 2953.08(G)(2)(a) does not permit an appellate court to modify or vacate a sentence because the record does not support findings under R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12.

State v. Costello · filed 2022-09-23(G)(2)(a)

Therefore, an appellate court may not rely upon R.C. 2953.08(G)(2)(a) to “modify or vacate a sentence based on the lack of support in the record for the trial court’s finding under R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12.”

Section 2953.08(G)(2)(b) does not permit an appellate court to modify or vacate a sentence because the record lacks support for the trial court’s findings under sections 2929.11 and 2929.12.

State v. Shelor · filed 2022-07-29(G)(2)(b)

An appellate court may not independently weigh the evidence and substitute its judgment for that of the trial court regarding the appropriate sentence under R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12, nor may it modify or vacate a sentence under R.C. 2953.08(G)(2)(b) based on the lack of support in the record for the trial court’s findings under those statutes.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) does not permit an appellate court to independently reweigh the evidence to decide which sentence best complies with R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12.

State v. Dixon · filed 2022-08-05(G)(2)

Here, appellant appears to request this appellate court to independently weigh evidence and substitute our judgment for that of the trial court to arrive at the sentence that best reflects compliance with R.C. 2929.11 and R.C. 2929.12. However, this court may not do so because Jones does not permit an appellate court to engage in this process.

Section 2953.08(G)(2)(b) does not permit an appellate court to modify or vacate a sentence because it finds the record does not support the sentence under R.C. 2929.11 or R.C. 2929.12.

State v. Fritz · filed 2022-08-08(G)(2)(b)

In effect, R.C. 2953.08(G)(2)(b) “does not provide a basis for an appellate court to modify or vacate a sentence based on its view that the sentence is not supported by the record under R.C. 2929.11 or R.C. 2929.12.” Jones, supra, at ¶39.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) does not permit an appellate court to independently reweigh the evidence and substitute its judgment for the trial court’s when reviewing compliance with felony sentencing principles and factors.

State v. Alter · filed 2022-08-17(G)(2)

Nothing in R.C. 2953.08(G)(2) permits this Court to independently weigh the evidence in the record and substitute our own judgment for that of the trial court to determine a sentence which best reflects compliance with R.C. 2929.11 and R.C. 2929.12.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) does not permit reversal of a felony sentence based solely on a challenge to the trial court’s consideration of R.C. 2929.12 factors.

State v. McIntire · filed 2022-08-19(G)(2)

Our review of felony sentences is governed by R.C. 2953.08(G)(2). ... As applied to this case, appellant’s argument herein is specifically, solely based upon disputing the trial court’s R.C. 2929.12 considerations. This does not constitute valid grounds for claimed error on appeal.

Section 2953.08(G)(2)(a) does not authorize an appellate court to modify or vacate a felony sentence because the record does not support it under sections 2929.11 or 2929.12.

State v. Stevens · filed 2022-08-26(G)(2)(a)

However, while a trial court must consider the statutory criteria that apply to every felony offense, including those set forth in R.C. 2929.11 and R.C. 2929.12, R.C. 2953.08(G)(2)(a) does not provide a basis to modify or vacate a sentence because it is not supported under R.C. 2929.11 or R.C. 2929.12.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) does not authorize an appellate court to review whether the record supports a sentence under R.C. 2929.11 or R.C. 2929.12.

State v. Fraley · filed 2022-09-19(G)(2)

In State v. Jones, 163 Ohio St.3d 242, 2020-Ohio-6729, the supreme court held that R.C. 2953.08(G)(2) does not authorize an appellate court to review whether the record supports a sentence under R.C. 2929.11 or R.C. 2929.12. Id. at ¶ 30. As a result, this court does not independently weigh the evidence in the record to substitute the judgment of the trial court.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) does not permit an appellate court to modify or vacate a felony sentence merely because the record does not support the trial court’s assessment of the R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12 factors.

State v. Jones · filed 2022-09-23(G)(2)

In Jones, the Supreme Court also confirmed that R.C. 2953.08(G)(2)(b) does not provide a mechanism for an appellate court to modify or vacate a felony sentence based upon a finding that the sentence is “contrary to law” because it clearly and convincingly is not supported by the record under R.C. 2929.11 and R.C. 2929.12. ... In light of the foregoing, Jones cannot demonstrate that his sentence was clearly and convincingly contrary to law, and his sentence must be affirmed.

Section 2953.08 does not permit an appellate court to reweigh the trial court’s assessment of the sentencing considerations in R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12.

State v. Cruz · filed 2022-09-23(G)(2)

Thus, the law clearly prohibits this court from examining the merits of appellant’s claims that the trial court’s sentence does not comport with the purposes of felony sentencing under R.C. 2929.11 and that the trial court improperly weighed the seriousness and recidivism factors in R.C. 2929.12.

Section 2953.08(G)(2)(b) does not permit an appellate court to modify or vacate a sentence merely because it disagrees with the trial court’s weighing of R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12.

State v. Anton · filed 2022-08-08(G)(2)(b)

R.C. 2953.08(G)(2)(b) does not provide a basis for an appellate court to modify or vacate a sentence based on its view that the sentence is not supported by the record under R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12.

Section 2953.08(G) does not permit an appellate court to independently reweigh the sentencing factors under sections 2929.11 and 2929.12.

State v. Frasca · filed 2022-08-22(G)

This court is not permitted to independently reweigh the competing factors on appeal.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that a felony sentence lacks support under the relevant statutes or is contrary to law before an appellate court may reverse it.

State v. Watkins · filed 2018-12-10(G)(2)

For these reasons we cannot find that Watkins has demonstrated by clear and convincing evidence that his sentence was unlawful or that the trial court unlawfully relied upon the fact that he had been adjudicated a delinquent child.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) permits an appellate court to modify or vacate a felony sentence only if it finds by clear and convincing evidence that the record does not support the trial court’s findings under relevant statutes or that the sentence is otherwise contrary to law.

State v. Gray · filed 2018-12-10(G)(2)

Rather, R.C. 2953.08(G)(2) provides that an appellate court can modify or vacate a sentence only if the appellate court finds by clear and convincing evidence that the record does not support the trial court's findings under relevant statutes or that the sentence is otherwise contrary to law.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) permits an appellate court to modify or vacate a felony sentence only upon clear and convincing evidence that the record does not support the trial court's findings under relevant statutes or that the sentence is contrary to law.

State v. Brown · filed 2018-12-10(G)(2)

Pursuant to R.C. 2953.08(G)(2), this court may modify or vacate a sentence only if, by clear and convincing evidence, "the record does not support the trial court's findings under relevant statutes or that the sentence is otherwise contrary to law."

Section 2953.08(G)(2) permits an appellate court to vacate or modify a felony sentence only when it clearly and convincingly finds that the record does not support the relevant sentencing findings or that the sentence is contrary to law.

State v. Kennedy · filed 2018-12-14(G)(2)

Pursuant to the plain language of R.C. 2953.08(G)(2), this court may vacate or modify Kennedy’s sentence only if it “determines by clear and convincing evidence that the record does not support the trial court’s findings under relevant statutes or that the sentence is otherwise contrary to law.”

Section 2953.08(G)(2) permits an appellate court to modify a felony sentence when clear and convincing evidence shows that the record does not support it.

State v. Anderson · filed 2018-12-17(G)(2)

“That is, an appellate court may vacate or modify any sentence that is not clearly and convincingly contrary to law only if the appellate court finds by clear and convincing evidence that the record does not support the sentence.” ... The record before the sentencing court clearly and convincingly supports the imposition of a prison sentence.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) permits an appellate court to modify or vacate a felony sentence only when clear and convincing evidence shows that the record does not support the required findings or that the sentence is contrary to law.

State v. Smith · filed 2018-12-28(G)(2)

Pursuant to R.C. 2953.08(G)(2), this court may modify or vacate a sentence only if, by clear and convincing evidence, "the record does not support the trial court's findings under relevant statutes or that the sentence is otherwise contrary to law."

Section 2953.08(G)(2) requires a defendant challenging a felony sentence to show by clear and convincing evidence that the sentence is contrary to law or unsupported by the record.

State v. Culbreth · filed 2019-01-09(G)(2)

When reviewing felony sentences appellate courts must apply the standard of review set forth in R.C. 2953.08(G)(2). ... The defendant bears the burden of establishing by clear and convincing evidence that the sentence is either contrary to law or not supported by the record.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) allows a reviewing court to modify or vacate a felony sentence only if it clearly and convincingly finds that the sentence is contrary to law or that the record does not support the sentencing court’s findings.

State v. Cephas · filed 2019-01-11(G)(2)

Before a reviewing court can modify or vacate a felony sentence, it must clearly and convincingly find that the sentence is contrary to law or that the record does not support the sentencing court’s findings.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) permits an appellate court to vacate or modify a sentence only upon a clear and convincing finding that the sentence is contrary to law or that the record does not support specified sentencing findings, including findings for consecutive sentences.

State v. Brady · filed 2019-01-11(G)(2)

Under the sentence-review standard set forth in R.C. 2953.08(G)(2), “we may vacate or modify a sentence only if we find, by clear and convincing evidence, that the sentence is contrary to law or that the record does not support the trial court’s findings under certain statutes (including the findings required for consecutive sentences).” State v. Beverly, 2016-Ohio-8078, 75 N.E.3d 847, ¶ 9 (2d Dist.), citing State v. Marcum, 146 Ohio St.3d 516, 2016-Ohio-1002, 59 N.E.3d 1231, ¶ 22.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) permits an appellate court to vacate or modify a felony sentence only upon a clear-and-convincing determination that the record does not support the required findings or that the sentence is contrary to law.

State v. Runnion · filed 2019-01-15(G)(2)

According to R.C. 2953.08(G)(2), “an appellate court may vacate or modify a felony sentence on appeal only if it determines by clear and convincing evidence that the record does not support the trial court’s findings under relevant statutes or that the sentence is otherwise contrary to law.”

Section 2953.08(G)(2) permits an appellate court to change or vacate a felony sentence if it clearly and convincingly finds that the record does not support the sentencing court’s findings or that the sentence is contrary to law.

State v. Wilson · filed 2019-01-17(G)(2)

R.C. 2953.08(G)(2) provides that an appellate court may increase, reduce, modify, or vacate and remand a felony sentence if the court clearly and convincingly finds either that the record does not support the sentencing court’s findings or the sentence is otherwise “contrary to law.”

Section 2953.08(G)(2) allows an appellate court to modify or vacate a felony sentence only when it clearly and convincingly finds that specified findings lack record support or that the sentence is contrary to law.

State v. Catron-Wagner · filed 2019-01-17(G)(2)

Under R.C. 2953.08(G)(2), an appellate court may increase, reduce, or modify a sentence, or it may vacate the sentence and remand for resentencing, only if it clearly and convincingly finds either (1) the record does not support certain specified findings or (2) the sentence imposed is contrary to law.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) permits an appellate court to modify or vacate a felony sentence when it clearly and convincingly finds that specified sentencing findings lack record support or that the sentence is contrary to law.

State v. Jefferson · filed 2019-01-18(G)(2)

R.C. 2953.08(G)(2) provides we may either increase, reduce, modify, or vacate a sentence and remand for resentencing where we clearly and convincingly find that either the record does not support the sentencing court's findings under R.C. 2929.13(B) or (D), 2929.14(B)(2)(e) or (C)(4), or 2929.20(I), or the sentence is otherwise contrary to law.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) permits an appellate court to modify or vacate a felony sentence upon clear and convincing evidence that the record does not support the required findings or that the sentence is contrary to law.

State v. Orender · filed 2019-01-22(G)(2)

Pursuant to R.C. 2953.08(G)(2), this court may modify or vacate a sentence if it finds, by clear and convincing evidence, "the record does not support the trial court's findings under relevant statutes or that the sentence is otherwise contrary to law."

Section 2953.08(G)(2)(b) requires clear and convincing evidence to find a felony sentence contrary to law on appeal.

State v. Calhoun · filed 2019-01-25(G)(2)(b)

We review a contrary-to-law challenge to a trial court’s felony sentencing determination for clear and convincing evidence in the record. ... Our review of the record finds clear and convincing evidence supporting appellant’s felony sentence for forgery, and the sentence was not contrary to law.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) permits an appellate court to change or vacate a felony sentence when it clearly and convincingly finds that specified sentencing findings lack record support or that the sentence is otherwise contrary to law.

State v. Jones · filed 2019-02-01(G)(2)

R.C. 2953.08(G)(2) provides that an appellate court may increase, reduce, modify, or vacate and remand a disputed sentence if it clearly and convincingly finds either of the following: (a) That the record does not support the sentencing court’s findings under division (B) or (D) of section 2929.13, division (B)(2)(e) or (C)(4) of section 2929.14, or division (I) of section 2929.20 of the Revised Code, whichever, if any, is relevant; or (b) That the sentence is otherwise contrary to law.

Section 2953.08(G)(2)(a) directs appellate courts to review the record and permits modification or vacation of a sentence when the record clearly and convincingly fails to support the required consecutive-sentence findings.

State v. Ghazi · filed 2019-02-04(G)(2)(a)

Rather, R.C. 2953.08(G)(2)(a) directs the appellate court "to review the record, including the findings underlying the sentence" and to modify or vacate the sentence "if it clearly and convincingly finds * * * [t]hat the record does not support the sentencing court's findings under division * * * (C)(4) of section 2929.14 * * * of the Revised Code."

Section 2953.08(G)(2) permits an appellate court to modify or vacate a felony sentence if it clearly and convincingly finds that the record does not support the required sentencing findings or that the sentence is contrary to law.

State v. Wiggins · filed 2019-02-07(G)(2)

Appellate review of felony sentences is governed by R.C. 2953.08, which provides that when reviewing felony sentences, this court may increase, reduce, modify a sentence, or vacate and remand for resentencing if we clearly and convincingly find that the record does not support the sentencing court’s statutory findings, if applicable, or the sentence is contrary to law.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) permits an appellate court to overturn consecutive sentences when the record clearly and convincingly fails to support the required findings or the sentence is otherwise contrary to law.

State v. F.F. · filed 2019-02-07(G)(2)

R.C. 2953.08(G)(2) provides two grounds for an appellate court to overturn the imposition of consecutive sentences: (1) the appellate court, upon its review, clearly and convincingly finds that “the record does not support the sentencing court’s findings” under R.C. 2929.14(C)(4); or (2) the sentence is “otherwise contrary to law.”

Section 2953.08(G)(2) allows an appellate court to overturn consecutive sentences if it clearly and convincingly finds that the record does not support the required findings or that the sentence is otherwise contrary to law.

State v. Dukes · filed 2019-02-07(G)(2)

R.C. 2953.08(G)(2) provides two grounds for an appellate court to overturn the imposition of consecutive sentences: (1) the appellate court, upon its review, clearly and convincingly finds that “the record does not support the sentencing court’s findings” under R.C. 2929.14(C)(4); or (2) the sentence is “otherwise contrary to law.”

Section 2953.08(G)(2) permits an appellate court to overturn consecutive felony sentences when it clearly and convincingly finds that the record does not support the required findings or that the sentence is otherwise contrary to law.

State v. Brooks · filed 2019-02-07(G)(2)

R.C. 2953.08(G)(2) provides that when reviewing felony sentences, a reviewing court may overturn the imposition of consecutive sentences where the court “clearly and convincingly” finds that (1) “the record does not support the sentencing court’s findings under R.C. 2929.14(C)(4),” or (2) “the sentence is otherwise contrary to law.”

Section 2953.08(G)(2) permits an appellate court to modify or vacate a felony sentence if it clearly and convincingly finds that the sentence is contrary to law.

State v. Ellis · filed 2019-02-08(G)(2)

R.C. 2953.08(G)(2) provides that an appellate court “may increase, reduce, or otherwise modify a sentence that is appealed under this section or may vacate the sentence and remand the matter to the sentencing court for resentencing * * * * if it clearly and convincingly finds: * * * (b) That the sentence is otherwise contrary to law.”

Section 2953.08(G)(2) permits an appellate court to modify or vacate a felony sentence when it clearly and convincingly finds that specified sentencing findings lack record support or that the sentence is otherwise contrary to law.

State v. Mayweather · filed 2019-02-08(G)(2)

R.C. 2953.08(G)(2) provides we may either increase, reduce, modify, or vacate a sentence and remand for resentencing where we clearly and convincingly find that either the record does not support the sentencing court’s findings under R.C. 2929.13(B) or (D), 2929.14(B)(2)(e) or (C)(4), or 2929.20(I), or the sentence is otherwise contrary to law.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) permits an appellate court to overturn consecutive felony sentences if it clearly and convincingly finds that the record does not support the required findings or that the sentence is otherwise contrary to law.

State v. Nelson · filed 2019-02-14(G)(2)

R.C. 2953.08(G)(2) provides that when reviewing felony sentences, a reviewing court may overturn the imposition of consecutive sentences where the court “clearly and convincingly” finds that (1) “the record does not support the sentencing court’s findings under R.C. 2929.14(C)(4),” or (2) “the sentence is otherwise contrary to law.”

Section 2953.08 permits a reviewing court to overturn consecutive sentences when it clearly and convincingly finds that the record does not support the required findings or that the sentence is otherwise contrary to law.

State v. Clardy · filed 2019-02-14

Pursuant to R.C. 2953.08, a reviewing court may overturn the imposition of consecutive sentences where it clearly and convincingly finds that the record does not support the sentencing court’s findings under R.C. 2929.14(C)(4), or the sentence is otherwise contrary to law.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) permits an appellate court to change or vacate a felony sentence only when it clearly and convincingly finds that specified findings lack record support or that the sentence is contrary to law.

State v. Creachbaum · filed 2019-02-15(G)(2)

Under R.C. 2953.08(G)(2), an appellate court may increase, reduce, or modify a sentence, or it may vacate the sentence and remand for resentencing, only if it “clearly and convincingly” finds either (1) that the record does not support certain specified findings or (2) that the sentence imposed is contrary to law.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) permits an appellate court to vacate or modify a felony sentence only when clear and convincing evidence shows that the record does not support the required findings or that the sentence is otherwise contrary to law.

State v. Gilbreath · filed 2019-02-22(G)(2)

Under the plain language of R.C. 2953.08(G)(2), “an appellate court may vacate or modify a felony sentence on appeal only if it determines by clear and convincing evidence that the record does not support the trial court's findings under relevant statutes or that the sentence is otherwise contrary to law.”

Section 2953.08(G)(2) permits an appellate court to change a felony sentence when it clearly and convincingly finds that the record does not support the sentencing court’s findings or that the sentence is contrary to law.

State v. Rouse · filed 2019-02-28(G)(2)

R.C. 2953.08(G)(2) provides that an appellate court may increase, reduce, modify, or vacate and remand a challenged felony sentence if the court clearly and convincingly finds either that the record does not support the sentencing court’s findings or the sentence is otherwise “contrary to law.”

Section 2953.08(G)(2) permits an appellate court to change a felony sentence only upon a clear and convincing finding that the record does not support specified findings or that the sentence is contrary to law.

State v. Hill · filed 2019-02-28(G)(2)

Under R.C. 2953.08(G)(2), an appellate court may increase, reduce, or modify a sentence, or it may vacate the sentence and remand for resentencing, only if it clearly and convincingly finds either (1) the record does not support certain specified findings, or (2) the sentence imposed is contrary to law.

Section 2953.08(G)(2) permits reversal of a felony sentence only when clear and convincing evidence shows that the required findings lack record support or that the sentence is otherwise contrary to law.

State v. McCallister · filed 2019-03-04(G)(2)

Under R.C. 2953.08(G)(2), an appellate court will reverse a sentence “only if it determines by clear and convincing evidence that the record does not support the trial court’s findings under relevant statutes or that the sentence is otherwise contrary to law.” State v. Marcum, 146 Ohio St.3d 516, 2016-Ohio-1002, ¶ 1.