[Cite as State v. West, 2011-Ohio-5215.]

COURT OF APPEALS 

MUSKINGUM COUNTY, OHIO 

FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT 

STATE OF OHIO : JUDGES: 

 : Hon. William B. Hoffman, P.J. 

 Plaintiff-Appellee : Hon. Sheila G. Farmer, J. 

 : Hon. Julie A. Edwards, J. 

-vs- : 

 : 

CODY WEST : Case No. CT11-0003 

 : 

 Defendant-Appellant : O P I N I O N

CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: Appeal from the Court of Common 

Pleas, Case. No. CR2010-0178 

JUDGMENT: Affirmed 

 

DATE OF JUDGMENT: October 6, 2011 

APPEARANCES: 

For Plaintiff-Appellee For Defendant-Appellant 

ROBERT L. SMITH ERIC J. ALLEN 

27 North Fifth Street 713 South Front Street 

Suite 201 Columbus, OH 43206 

Zanesville, OH 43701 
Muskingum County, Case No. CT11-0003 2 

Farmer, J. 

{¶1} On September 1, 2010, the Muskingum County Grand Jury indicted 

appellant, Cody West, on one count of robbery in violation of R.C. 2911.02 and one 

count of possession of criminal tools in violation of R.C. 2923.24. Said charges arose 

from a robbery at the Starfire Gas Station in Zanesville, Ohio. 

{¶2} On October 27, 2010, appellant pled guilty to the robbery count. The 

remaining count was nolled. By entry filed December 7, 2010, the trial court sentenced 

appellant to three years in prison. 

{¶3} Appellant filed an appeal and this matter is now before this court for 

consideration. Assignment of error is as follows: 

I 

{¶4} "THE TRIAL COURT ABUSED ITS DISCRETION IN SENTENCING THE 

DEFENDANT TO THREE YEARS IN PRISON." 

I 

{¶5} Appellant claims the trial court abused its discretion in sentencing him to 

three years in prison. We disagree. 

{¶6} Specifically, appellant argues his sentence of three years for robbery in 

the second degree "is a waste of resources to incarcerate an admitted addict with no 

chance of rehabilitation in prison." Appellant's Brief at 3. 

{¶7} R.C. 2929.11 governs overriding purposes of felony sentences and states 

as follows: 

{¶8} "(A) A court that sentences an offender for a felony shall be guided by the 

overriding purposes of felony sentencing. The overriding purposes of felony sentencing 
Muskingum County, Case No. CT11-0003 3 

are to protect the public from future crime by the offender and others and to punish the 

offender using the minimum sanctions that the court determines accomplish those 

purposes without imposing an unnecessary burden on state or local government 

resources. To achieve those purposes, the sentencing court shall consider the need for 

incapacitating the offender, deterring the offender and others from future crime, 

rehabilitating the offender, and making restitution to the victim of the offense, the public, 

or both. 

{¶9} "(B) A sentence imposed for a felony shall be reasonably calculated to 

achieve the two overriding purposes of felony sentencing set forth in division (A) of this 

section, commensurate with and not demeaning to the seriousness of the offender's 

conduct and its impact upon the victim, and consistent with sentences imposed for 

similar crimes committed by similar offenders." 

{¶10} R.C. 2929.13 governs sentencing guidelines for various specific offenses 

and degrees of offenses. Subsection (A) states as follows in pertinent part: 

{¶11} "Except as provided in division (E), (F), or (G) of this section and unless a 

specific sanction is required to be imposed or is precluded from being imposed pursuant 

to law, a court that imposes a sentence upon an offender for a felony may impose any 

sanction or combination of sanctions on the offender that are provided in sections 

2929.14 to 2929.18 of the Revised Code. The sentence shall not impose an 

unnecessary burden on state or local government resources." 

{¶12} The very language of R.C. 2929.13 grants trial courts discretion to 

impose sentences. Pursuant to R.C. 2929.14(A)(2), a felony of the second degree is 
Muskingum County, Case No. CT11-0003 4 

punishable by "two, three, four, five, six, seven, or eight years." Appellant was 

sentenced to three years in prison, within the permissible range. 

{¶13} In sentencing appellant to three years, the trial court noted, "[u]pon review 

of the presentence investigation, the Court will note, as indicated by counsel, you have 

no felony record as an adult, but you committed a felony, similar crime, when you were 

a juvenile, as well as other felonies at DYS." December 6, 2010 T. at 5. 

{¶14} While appellant argues he is an admitted drug user and has mental health 

problems and therefore incarceration would be a waste of resources, protecting the 

public and punishment are the focus of R.C. 2929.11, not rehabilitation. The trial court 

found appellant had committed a similar crime while a juvenile, as well as other felonies 

while in the custody of the Department of Youth Services. In committing the robbery of 

the gas station, appellant struck an employee, a struggle ensued, and he continued to 

strike the employee while demanding money. See, Appellant's Brief, Statement of the 

Facts. The trial court sentenced appellant to three years, the low end of the range of 

sentences for a second degree felony. 

{¶15} Upon review, we find the trial court did not abuse its discretion in 

sentencing appellant to three years in prison. 

{¶16} The sole assignment of error is denied. 
Muskingum County, Case No. CT11-0003 5 

{¶17} The judgment of the Court of Common Pleas of Muskingum County, Ohio 

is hereby affirmed. 

By Farmer, J. 

Hoffman, P.J. and 

Edwards, J. concur. 

 

 

 

 _s / Sheila G. Farmer_________________ 

 

 _s/ William B. Hoffman________________ 

 _s/ Julie A. Edwards__________________ 

 JUDGES 

SGF/sg 916 
[Cite as State v. West, 2011-Ohio-5215.]

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR MUSKINGUM COUNTY, OHIO 

FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT 

STATE OF OHIO : 

 : 

 Plaintiff-Appellee : 

 : 

-vs- : JUDGMENT ENTRY 

 : 

CODY WEST : 

 : 

 Defendant-Appellant : CASE NO. CT11-0003 

For the reasons stated in our accompanying Memorandum-Opinion, the 

judgment of the Court of Common Pleas of Muskingum County, Ohio is affirmed. Costs 

to appellant. 

 _s/ Sheila G. Farmer__________________ 

 

 _s/ William B. Hoffman________________ 

 _s/ Julie A. Edwards__________________ 

 JUDGES