 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Hendrickson2/7/2003
. In this action, Paul Hendrickson appeals from his conviction and sentence on charges of involuntary manslaughter, aggravated vehicular homicide, aggravated vehicular assault, fleeing and eluding a police officer, felonious assault of a police officer, and unauthorized use of a motor vehicle. After Hendrickson pled no contest to the charges, the trial court sentenced him to seven years for involuntary manslaughter (count one) and seven years for aggravated vehicular assault (count two), to be served concurrent with count one. Various sentences were imposed on the remaining charges, resulting in a total term of ten years.
. Hendrickson's original appellate counsel filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California (1967), 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493, indicating that he could not find any possible meritorious issues for appellate review, other than what appeared to be a clerical defect in the sentencing entry. (The aggregate sentence imposed in the entry appears to be thirteen years, but the entry also says that a total ten year sentence is being imposed. The trial court clearly intended, however, only to impose a total of ten years).
. After reviewing the record, we filed an entry discussing the Anders brief. We briefly considered a suppression motion that Hendrickson had filed in the trial court, but found no arguable merit to any issues raised in the motion. However, we did express concern over the trial court's decision to impose concurrent sentences for both involuntary manslaughter and aggravated vehicular homicide, since the victim of each offense was the same person. Consequently, we appointed new counsel to address this issue, as well as any other issues counsel might discover. See State v. Hendrickson (May 24, 2002), Montgomery App. No. 19045.
. New appellate counsel subsequently filed a brief, raising the following assignment of error:
. "The Trial Court violated Hendrickson's Fifth Amendment rights by entering convictions and sentencing him on both involuntary manslaughter and aggravated vehicular homicide."
. After considering the applicable law, we find the single assignment of error without merit. We have reservations about the correctness of sentencing Hendrickson on both charges, but feel we have no choice under the law established in State v. Rance, 85 Ohio St.3d 632, 1999-Ohio-291. Accordingly, we will affirm the trial court judgment.
I.
. The charges against Hendrickson arose from a fatal automobile accident that took place in the early morning hours of February 10, 2001. At the time of the accident, Henderson was being pursued by a police cruiser. Hendrickson had failed to stop on a police officer's command, and had nearly collided with the officer's cruiser. During the ensuing chase, Hendrickson's truck rear-ended a 1989 Honda Civic that was stopped at a red light. The Honda was propelled into the intersection and then collided with a third vehicle. The driver of the Honda was pronounced dead at the scene, and the driver of the third vehicle received injuries to his lung, hip, and stomach.
. Hendrickson was taken to the hospital, where his blood alcohol level was revealed to be significantly over the legal limit (according to the evidence at the suppression hearing). Subsequently, Hendrickson was indicted on several charges, including involuntary manslaughter and aggravated vehicular homicide. During the sentencing hearing, the trial judge stated that the involuntary manslaughter and aggravated vehicular homicide charges would merge by law, so that the seven year sentence for involuntary manslaughter would be served concurrently with the seven year sentence for
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Ohio DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|