[Cite as State v. Graham, 2014-Ohio-1024.]

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS 

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO 

HAMILTON COUNTY, OHIO 

STATE OF OHIO, 

 Plaintiff-Appellee, 

 vs. 

ANDREW GRAHAM, 

 Defendant-Appellant. 

:

: 

: 

: 

: 

APPEAL NO. C-130375 

TRIAL NO. B-1300494B 

 O P I N I O N.

 

Criminal Appeal From: Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas 

 

Judgment Appealed From Is: Affirmed in Part, Reversed in Part, and Cause 

Remanded 

Date of Judgment Entry on Appeal: March 19, 2014 

Joseph T. Deters, Hamilton County Prosecuting Attorney, and Scott M. Heenan, 

Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Roger W. Kirk, for Defendant-Appellant. 

Please note: this case has been removed from the accelerated calendar.
OHIO FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

2

SYLVIA S. HENDON, Presiding Judge. 

{¶1} Defendant-appellant Andrew Graham pled guilty to robbery under 

R.C. 2911.02(A)(2). The trial court imposed a sentence of seven years’ 

imprisonment. 

{¶2} Because the trial court failed to properly notify Graham about his 

postrelease-control obligations, we remand this cause for the trial court to correct 

that portion of Graham’s sentence and provide the required postrelease-control 

notification. The trial court’s judgment is otherwise affirmed. 

Postrelease Control 

{¶3} Graham raises two separate arguments in his first assignment of error. 

He first contends that the trial court erred by failing to notify him during his 

sentencing hearing about the potential consequences for violating postrelease 

control. The state concedes in its appellate brief that the trial court failed to properly 

notify Graham about his postrelease-control obligations. 

{¶4} Pursuant to R.C. 2967.28(B), because Graham pled guilty to a felony of 

the second degree, he was subject to a three-year period of postrelease-control 

supervision following his release from prison. The trial court was required under 

R.C. 2929.19(B)(2)(c) to notify Graham that he would be so supervised. The trial 

court was also required to notify Graham that, if he violated a term or condition of 

his postrelease control, the parole board could impose a prison term of up to one-half 

of the stated prison term originally imposed by the trial court. R.C. 2929.19(B)(2)(e). 

See State v. Williams, 1st Dist. Hamilton No. C-081148, 2010-Ohio-1879, ¶ 20. 
OHIO FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

3

{¶5} Here, the trial court properly notified Graham during his plea hearing 

about the mandatory period of postrelease control and the consequences for 

committing a postrelease-control violation. But at the sentencing hearing, the trial 

court stated “if you are placed on postrelease control, upon your release from the 

institution, if you violate any of the terms and conditions of your postrelease control, 

the Parole Authority can give you an additional, it’s three and a half years in the state 

penitentiary.” The trial court appropriately informed Graham of the amount of time 

that he could be incarcerated for a violation of postrelease control. But the court 

failed to notify Graham that he was subject to a mandatory period of postrelease 

control. 

{¶6} When a trial court fails to properly advise an offender about 

postrelease control, the court has violated its statutory duty, and the portion of the 

offender’s sentence relating to postrelease control is void. Id. Because the trial court 

failed to provide Graham with the proper postrelease-control notification, we sustain 

in part Graham’s first assignment of error, and we remand this cause for the trial 

court to apply the procedures outlined in R.C. 2929.191 to correct the postreleasecontrol-related sentencing errors. 

Prison-Time Credit 

{¶7} Graham further argues under his first assignment of error that the trial 

court erred by failing to advise him of his right to earn limited prison-time credit 

under R.C. 2967.193 for his participation in various prison programs. He contends 

that his guilty plea was not entered knowingly or voluntarily because the trial court 

failed to advise him of this during his plea hearing and that his sentence should be 

vacated because of the trial court’s error. 
OHIO FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

4

{¶8} The trial court fully complied with Crim.R. 11(C) and conducted a 

complete plea colloquy with Graham. The trial court was not required to notify 

Graham about a right to earn prison-time credit before accepting his guilty plea. 

Graham entered his plea knowingly and voluntarily. 

{¶9} We interpret Graham’s contention that his sentence must be vacated 

because the trial court failed to inform him of the possibility of earning prison-time 

credit under R.C. 2967.193 as an argument that the trial court was required to 

provide him with this information during his sentencing hearing. This argument is 

also without merit. Former R.C. 2929.14(D)(3) required that the trial court inform 

an offender of the offender’s eligibility to earn days of credit as prescribed by R.C. 

2967.193. But that statute was amended by Am.Sub.S.B. No. 337, and that language 

was repealed. The trial court was not required to inform Graham of his potential 

eligibility to earn prison-time credit under R.C. 2967.193. Graham’s argument is 

overruled. The first assignment of error is, accordingly, sustained in part and 

overruled in part. 

Sentencing 

{¶10} In his second assignment of error, Graham argues that the trial court 

erred by imposing an excessive sentence. 

{¶11} This court may only vacate or modify a defendant’s sentence if we 

clearly and convincingly find that the record does not support the mandatory 

sentencing findings or that the sentence imposed is otherwise contrary to law. State 

v. White, 2013-Ohio-4225, 997 N.E.2d 629, ¶ 11 (1st Dist.). Graham argues that 

because he had demonstrated extreme remorse and indicated that he wanted to 

participate in a trade program while in prison, the trial court should not have 
OHIO FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

5

imposed a sentence that was only one year less than the maximum. We are not 

persuaded. Graham committed the robbery on the same day that he had been 

released from jail on unrelated charges. The sentence fell within the available 

statutory sentencing range and was not contrary to law. The trial court did not err in 

the imposition of sentence. 

{¶12} Graham additionally argues under this assignment of error that the 

trial court erred by failing to inform him, as is required by R.C. 2947.23(A)(1), that 

he could be required to perform community service in lieu of paying court costs. We 

recently addressed the identical argument in State v. Bailey, 1st Dist. Hamilton Nos. 

C-130245 and C-130246, 2013-Ohio-5512. In Bailey, we noted that a prior version of 

R.C. 2947.23(A)(1) contained the requirement that a trial court notify a defendant 

that the defendant could be required to perform community service in lieu of paying 

court costs. Id. at ¶ 5. But we explained that the current version of the statute, in 

effect at the time of sentencing for both Bailey and Graham, requires that a trial 

court provide this notification only when “the judge or magistrate imposes a 

community control sanction or other nonresidential sanction.” Id., quoting State v. 

Gates, 11th Dist. Portage No. 2011-P-0001, 2013-Ohio-4284, fn. 1. 

{¶13} The trial court sentenced Graham to a term of imprisonment and did 

not impose community control or another nonresidential sanction. Consequently, 

the trial court was not required to inform Graham that he could be required to 

perform community service in lieu of paying court costs. The second assignment of 

error is overruled. 
OHIO FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

6

{¶14} This cause is remanded for the trial court to properly notify Graham 

about his postrelease-control obligations. The judgment of the trial court is 

otherwise affirmed. 

Judgment affirmed in part, reversed in part, and cause remanded. 

DINKELACKER and DEWINE, JJ., concur. 

Please note: 

 The court has recorded its own entry on the date of the release of this opinion.