[Cite as State v. Hull, 2022-Ohio-4274.]

COURT OF APPEALS

KNOX COUNTY, OHIO

FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

STATE OF OHIO : JUDGES:

: Hon. Earle E. Wise, Jr., P.J.

 Plaintiff-Appellee : Hon. W. Scott Gwin, J.

: Hon. Craig R. Baldwin, J.

-vs- :

:

CURTIS HULL : Case No. 22-CA-10

:

 Defendant-Appellant : O P I N I O N

CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: Appeal from the Court of Common 

Pleas, Case No. 20CR12-0294

JUDGMENT: Sentence Vacated and Remanded

DATE OF JUDGMENT: November 29, 2022

APPEARANCES:

For Plaintiff-Appellee For Defendant-Appellant

CHARLES T. MCCONVILLE TODD W. BARSTOW

117 East High Street 261 West Johnstown Road

Suite 234 Suite 204

Mount Vernon, OH 43050 Columbus, OH 43230
Knox County, Case No. 22-CA-10 2

Wise, Earle, P.J.

{¶ 1} Defendant-Appellant, Curtis Hull, appeals his May 12, 2022 sentence from 

the Court of Common Pleas of Knox County, Ohio. Plaintiff-Appellee is state of Ohio.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

{¶ 2} On December 14, 2020, the Knox County Grand Jury indicted appellant on 

one count of failure to use turn signal in violation of R.C. 4511.39 (Count 1), one count of 

failure to stop at grade crossing in violation of R.C. 4511.61(D) (Count 2), one count of 

failure to comply with order or signal of police officer in violation of R.C. 2921.331(B)

(Count 3), one count of driving under lifetime suspension in violation of R.C. 4510.18(A)

(Count 4), one count of having weapons while under disability in violation of R.C. 

2923.13(A)(2) (Count 5), and one count of criminal damaging in violation of R.C. 

2909.06(A)(1) (Count 6).

{¶ 3} On April 18, 2022, appellant pled no contest to the charges. The trial court 

found appellant guilty of all charges. A sentencing hearing was held on May 11, 2022. 

By judgment entry filed May 12, 2022, the trial court sentenced appellant to thirty months 

on Count 3, thirty months on Count 4, and thirty months on Count 5, to be served 

consecutively, and ninety days on Count six, to be served concurrently to the consecutive 

sentences.

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

consideration. Assignments of error are as follows:

I
Knox County, Case No. 22-CA-10 3

{¶ 5} "THE TRIAL COURT ERRED TO THE PREJUDICE OF APPELLANT BY 

IMPROPERLY SENTENCING HIM TO CONSECUTIVE TERMS OF INCARCERATION 

IN CONTRAVENTION OF OHIO'S SENTENCING STATUTES."

II

{¶ 6} "APPELLANT'S TRIAL COUNSEL WAS INEFFECTIVE THEREBY 

DEPRIVING HIM OF THE EFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL PURSUANT TO 

THE SIXTH AND FOURTEENTH AMENDMENTS TO THE UNITED STATES 

CONSTITUTION."

I

{¶ 7} In his first assignment of error, appellant claims the trial court erred in 

improperly sentencing him to consecutive terms in contravention of Ohio's sentencing 

statutes. We agree.

{¶ 8} In his appellate brief at 3, appellant argues the trial court fell short of the 

mandate announced in State v. Bonnell, 140 Ohio St.3d 209, 2014-Ohio-3177, 16 N.E.3d 

659, wherein the Supreme Court of Ohio held at ¶ 37: "In order to impose consecutive 

terms of imprisonment, a trial court is required to make the findings mandated by R.C. 

2929.14(C)(4) at the sentencing hearing and incorporate its findings into its sentencing 

entry, but it has no obligation to state reasons to support its findings." Appellant argues 

the trial court failed to justify consecutive service between Counts 4 and 5 during the 

sentencing hearing.

{¶ 9} In its appellate brief at 5, the state concedes the issue: "However, the 

transcript does not contain the findings from R.C. 2929.14(C) that consecutive service is 
Knox County, Case No. 22-CA-10 4

necessary to protect the public from future crimes by the offender, and that consecutive 

sentences are not disproportionate to the defendant's conduct."

{¶ 10} Upon review, we find the trial court erred in imposing consecutive 

sentences. We vacate the sentence and remand the matter to the trial court for 

resentencing pursuant to R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) and Bonnell.

{¶ 11} Assignment of Error I is granted.

II

{¶ 12} In his second assignment of error, appellant claims his trial counsel was 

ineffective by failing to keep him informed of plea offers. Because of our decision in the 

first assignment of error, we find this assignment to be premature.

{¶ 13} The sentence of the Court of Common Pleas of Knox County, Ohio is 

hereby vacated, and the matter is remanded to said court for resentencing consistent with 

this opinion.

By Wise, Earle, P.J.

Gwin, J. and

Baldwin, J. concur.

EEW/db