[Cite as State v. Watters, 2018-Ohio-4565.]

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO 

TENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT 

State of Ohio, : 

 Plaintiff-Appellee, : No. 18AP-140 

 (C.P.C. No. 16CR-3623)

v. : 

 (REGULAR CALENDAR) 

Dametrius Watters, : 

 Defendant-Appellant. : 

 

D E C I S I O N 

Rendered on November 13, 2018 

 

On brief: Ron O'Brien, Prosecuting Attorney, and 

Barbara A. Farnbacher, for appellee. 

On brief: The Law Office of Thomas F. Hayes, LLC, and 

Thomas F. Hayes, for appellant. 

 

APPEAL from the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas 

LUPER SCHUSTER, J. 

{¶ 1} Defendant-appellant, Dametrius Watters, appeals from a judgment entry of 

the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas finding him guilty of one count of improperly 

discharging a firearm at or into a habitation or school safety zone, one count of discharging 

a firearm on or near prohibited premises, one count of improperly handling firearms in a 

motor vehicle, and one count of having a weapon while under disability. The first count 

contained an accompanying drive-by shooting specification, and the first three counts each 

contained accompanying three-year firearm specifications. Because the trial court erred in 

imposing a three-year firearm specification on Count 3, improperly handling firearms in a 

motor vehicle, we reverse. 

 
No. 18AP-140 2 

I. Facts and Procedural History 

{¶ 2} By indictment filed July 1, 2016, plaintiff-appellee, State of Ohio, charged 

Watters with one count of improperly discharging a firearm at or into a habitation or school 

safety zone in violation of R.C. 2923.161, a second-degree felony, along with an 

accompanying three-year firearm specification pursuant to R.C. 2941.145(A) and a fiveyear drive-by shooting specification pursuant to R.C. 2941.146(A); one count of discharging 

a firearm on or near prohibited premises in violation of R.C. 2923.162, a third-degree 

felony, along with an accompanying three-year firearm specification pursuant to R.C. 

2941.145(A); one count of improperly handling firearms in a motor vehicle in violation of 

R.C. 2923.16, a fourth-degree felony, along with an accompanying three-year firearm 

specification pursuant to R.C. 2941.145(A); and two counts of having weapons while under 

disability in violation of R.C. 2923.13, both third-degree felonies. The charges stemmed 

from a drive-by shooting into a house on June 23, 2016. Watters entered a plea of not 

guilty. 

{¶ 3} Following a trial conducted November 13-16, 2017, a jury found Watters 

guilty of improperly discharging a firearm at or into a habitation or school safety zone, 

discharging a firearm on or near prohibited premises, and improperly handling firearms in 

a motor vehicle, along with all accompanying specifications. Watters waived his right to a 

jury trial on the having a weapon while under disability charges, and the trial court found 

Watters guilty of one count of having a weapon while under disability and entered a nolle 

prosequi to the remaining count of having a weapon while under disability. 

{¶ 4} At a December 13, 2017 sentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced Watters 

to three years on the charge of improperly discharging a firearm at or into a habitation or 

school safety zone, plus three years on the firearm specification and five years on the driveby shooting specification; merged the count of discharging a firearm on or near prohibited 

premises with Count 1; one year on the charge of improperly handling firearms in a motor 

vehicle, plus three years on the firearm specification; and three years on the charge of 

having a weapon while under disability. Additionally, the trial court imposed a three-year 

period of post-release control. The court ordered the sentences on the base offenses to be 

concurrent and for the mandatory specifications to be consecutive for an aggregate prison 

term of 11 years. Additionally, the trial court ordered the sentences in this case to run 
No. 18AP-140 3 

consecutive to the sentences imposed for Watters convictions in Franklin C.P. No. 16CR3569. The trial court journalized Watters' convictions and sentence in a January 26, 2018 

judgment entry. Watters timely appeals. 

II. Assignment of Error 

{¶ 5} Watters assigns the following error for our review: 

On Count 3, the court imposed a three-year sentence for the 

firearm specification. 

III. Analysis – Sentencing for Firearm Specification 

{¶ 6} In his sole assignment of error, Watters argues the trial court erred in 

imposing a three-year firearm specification on his conviction for Count 3 of the indictment, 

improperly handling a firearm in a motor vehicle. 

{¶ 7} An appellate court will not reverse a trial court's sentencing decision unless 

the evidence is clear and convincing that either the record does not support the sentence or 

that the sentence is contrary to law. State v. Chandler, 10th Dist. No. 04AP-895, 2005-

Ohio-1961, ¶ 10, citing State v. Maxwell, 10th Dist. No. 02AP-1271, 2004-Ohio-5660, ¶ 27, 

citing State v. Comer, 99 Ohio St.3d 463, 2003-Ohio-4165, ¶ 10. See also State v. Marcum, 

146 Ohio St.3d 516, 2016-Ohio-1002, ¶ 1 ("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").

{¶ 8} A jury found Watters guilty to Count 3 of the indictment, improperly handling 

a firearm in a motor vehicle, in violation of R.C. 2923.16. The trial court then sentenced 

Watters to 12 months in prison on the base offense along with an additional 3 years 

pursuant to the accompanying firearm specification. R.C. 2929.14(B)(1)(a) and (b) outline 

the mandatory prison sentences for accompanying firearm specifications. However, 

pursuant to R.C. 2929.14(B)(1)(e), "[t]he court shall not impose any of the prison terms 

described in division (B)(1)(a) or (b) of this section upon an offender for a violation of * * * 

[R.C.] 2923.16," the improperly handling a firearm in a motor vehicle statute. The state 

concedes it was error for the trial court to impose a prison sentence for the firearm 

specification accompanying Watters' conviction for improperly handling a firearm in a 

motor vehicle. See State v. Wright, 10th Dist. No. 09AP-207, 2009-Ohio-6773, ¶ 32 
No. 18AP-140 4 

(former R.C. 2929.14(D)(1)(e), the equivalent of current R.C. 2929.14(B)(1)(e), precludes 

the imposition of a firearm specification sentence on a conviction of improperly handling a 

firearm in a motor vehicle). 

{¶ 9} Because the trial court erred in imposing the three-year sentence on the 

firearm specification accompanying Watters' conviction of improperly handling a firearm 

in a motor vehicle, that portion of Watters' sentence is contrary to law. Accordingly, we 

remand the matter to the trial court for resentencing. We sustain Watters' sole assignment 

of error. 

IV. Disposition 

{¶ 10} Based on the foregoing reasons, the trial court erred in imposing a prison 

sentence on the firearm specification accompanying Watters' conviction of improperly 

handling a firearm in a motor vehicle. Having sustained Watters' sole assignment of error, 

we reverse the judgment of the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas and remand this 

matter to that court for resentencing in accordance with law and consistent with this 

decision.

Judgment reversed; cause remanded. 

TYACK and SADLER, JJ., concur.