 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Searcy1/24/2003
JUDGMENT: Affirmed in part. Reversed and Remanded in part.
. Samuel Searcy ("Appellant") appeals from the five-year maximum sentence he received from the Mahoning County Common Pleas Court after a jury convicted him of aggravated vehicular homicide, with specifications for driving under the influence ("DUI") and driving under suspension ("DUS"). Appellant challenges the sentence imposed on two grounds. First, Appellant maintains that the trial court failed to make the findings required under R.C. 2929.14(C) for imposing a maximum term. Second, Appellant argues that the trial court erred by failing to ask him directly if he wished to exercise his right to allocution. After reviewing the record, we reverse and remand this cause for the trial court to determine whether a maximum sentence is warranted under R.C. 2929.14(C), and if so, to amend its judgment entry to expressly reflect that decision and the reasons underpinning it. We also conclude that the trial court's failure to expressly provide Appellant, himself, the right of allocution was harmless.
. On January 17, 2000, while traveling east on the Ohio Turnpike, Appellant crashed his sport utility vehicle into the rear end of a Ford Contour driven by Brenda Wyman. The impact forced the Ford off the highway and onto the berm where it careened into a car carrier stopped along side the road. Ms. Wyman, a nurse and mother of five children, was killed. Witnesses estimated Appellant's speed just prior to the collision at upwards of 90 miles per hour. A subsequent test revealed that Appellant had a blood alcohol level of .219. Police at the scene noted his slurred speech, glassy eyes, and the fact that he reeked of alcohol. Appellant admitted that he was drinking.
. A grand jury indicted Appellant, charging him with aggravated vehicular homicide with DUI and DUS specifications. On September 1, 2000, a jury found him guilty.
. Prior to sentencing, friends and family of both Appellant and the victim offered their respective opinions on the length of sentence the court should impose. The record contains an impressive assortment of letters each addressing whether Appellant should receive a maximum or minimum term of imprisonment. In a six-page handwritten submission, Appellant expressed remorse over the accident, his role in it, and a desire to somehow rectify the irreparable damage he caused. The following passage is illustrative of the tone of that submission:
. "* * * I must recognize that alcohol use is a contributing factor in most accidents and fatalities. I recognize now that this is a serious disease in our society that many are ignorant about. As it relates to my substance abuse I had been clean since the 1994 D.U.I. I had made great progress in recovery until December of 1999. However, I relapsed and that downward emotional path began. Another reason January 17, 2000 is the worse (sic) haunting day of my life is because I purposed that morning to check into Gateway Rehab. Center in Monroeville, Pa. I became preoccupied with church obligations, M.L.K Holiday, and, a 16 yr. old pregnant daughter who had ran away from home and had been missing for three (3) days. I wish I had checked in that morning like I had promised myself. But, that was no excuse for me to get on the road * * *. It was not worth the life of Ms. Wyman. After I was released from jail on bond, I immediately checked into Gateway * * * I completed successfully a treatment program * * * ." (Appellant's submission Sept. 16, 2000, pp. 2-3).
. At the sentencing hearing, representatives from both sides made extensive oral presentations in aggravation and mitigation. Before imposing the maximum sentence, the trial co
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.
|
|