[Cite as State v. Knuckles , 2013-Ohio-4024.]

STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS )ss: NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF SUMMIT )

STATE OF OHIO Appellee

v.

RODNEY KNUCKLES Appellant C.A. No. 26830

APPEAL FROM JUDGMENT ENTERED IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS COUNTY OF SUMMIT, OHIO CASE No. CR 10 04 1130

DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY Dated: September 18, 2013

MOORE, Presiding Judge. {¶1} Defendant-Appellant, Rodney Knuckles, appeals from the February 15, 2013 judgment entry of the Summit County Court of Common Pleas. We affirm.

I. {¶2} In October of 2010, Mr. Knuckles pleaded gu ilty to burglary, in violation of R.C. 2911.12(A)(3), a felony of the third degree. The trial court sentenced him to five years of imprisonment, suspended, with two years of comm unity control. In April of 2012, Mr. Knuckles violated the terms of his community control, pl eaded guilty, and was sentenced to an additional two years of community control with all other terms of his sentence remaining in full effect. A few weeks later, Mr. Knuckles again violated the terms of his community control and later pleaded guilty to the charges. In July of 2012, th e trial court sentenced him to a definite period of five years of imprisonment, not mandatory, to run concurrently with a sentence imposed in

another case.2

{¶3} Mr. Knuckles did not appeal from the Apr il or July judgment entries. {¶4} On October 24, 2012, Mr. Knuckles filed a motion to correct an improper sentence pursuant to Crim.R. 36. In his motio n, Mr. Knuckles argued that, based upon the enactment of H.B. 86 in 2011, the maximum senten ce for a third degree felony is thirty-six months. Mr. Knuckles also relied upon the Tent h District Court of Appeals’ decision in State v.

Nistelbeck , 10th Dist. Franklin County No. 11AP-874, 2012-Ohio-1765. The trial court denied Mr. Knuckles’ motion stating that (1) senten ce was imposed, although suspended, in 2010, and (2) his argument is barred by the doctrine of res judicata. {¶5} Mr. Knuckles appealed, presenting one assignment of error for our consideration.

II.

ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR THE TRIAL COURT ERRED AND ABUSED IT[S] DISCRETION AND DID NOT COMPLY WITH THE STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS [] WHEN IT IMPOSED A PRISON TERM FOR A VIOLATION OF COMMUNITY CONTROL ON [JUNE 26, 2012]. {¶6} In his sole assignment of error, Mr. Knuckles argues that the trial court erred in sentencing him to five years of imprisonment for burglary, a third degree felony, in its July 3, 2012 judgment entry. {¶7} The record indicates, however, that Mr. K nuckles did not appeal from the July 3, 2012 judgment entry. As such, Mr. Knuckles’ ar gument is barred under the doctrine of res judicata. The doctrine of res judicata “bars the asse rtion of claims against a valid, final judgment

of conviction that have been raised or could have been raised on appeal.” State v. Ketterer, 126 Ohio St.3d 448, 2010-Ohio-3831, ¶ 59, citing State v. Perry, 10 Ohio St.2d 175 (1967), paragraph nine of the syllabus.3

{¶8} Therefore, because Mr. Knuckles could ha ve raised this issue on direct appeal from the July 3, 2012 judgment entry, he is now ba rred from asserting it unde r the doctrine of res judicata. {¶9} Accordingly, Mr. Knuckles’ assignment of error is overruled.

III. {¶10} In overruling Mr. Knuckles’ sole assignment of error, the judgment of the Summit County Court of Common Pleas is affirmed. Judgment affirmed.

There were reasonable grounds for this appeal. We order that a special mandate issue out of this Court, directing the Court of Common Pleas, County of Summit, State of Ohio, to carry this judgment into execution. A certified copy of this journal entry shall constitute the manda te, pursuant to App.R. 27. Immediately upon the filing hereof, this docum ent shall constitute the journal entry of judgment, and it shall be file stamped by the Clerk of the Court of Appeals at which time the period for review shall begin to run. App.R. 22 (C). The Clerk of the Court of Appeals is instructed to mail a notice of entry of this judgment to the parties and to make a notation of the mailing in the docket, pursuant to App.R. 30. Costs taxed to Appellant.

CARLA MOORE FOR THE COURT4

BELFANCE, J. CARR, J. CONCUR.

APPEARANCES: RODNEY KNUCKLES, pro se, Appellant. SHERRI BEVAN WALSH, Prosecuting Attorney, and RICHARD S. KASAY, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for Appellee.