[Cite as State v. Foster, 2023-Ohio-728.]

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

CLARK COUNTY

STATE OF OHIO

 Appellee 

v. 

REGAN FOSTER

 Appellant

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

C.A. No. 2021-CA-50

Trial Court Case No. 21-CR-0408E

(Criminal Appeal from Common Pleas 

Court)

. . . . . . . . . . .

O P I N I O N

Rendered on March 10, 2023

. . . . . . . . . . . 

IAN A. RICHARDSON, Attorney for Appellee

 

ADAM JAMES STOUT, Attorney for Appellant

 . . . . . . . . . . . . .

TUCKER, J.

{¶ 1} Appellee, the State of Ohio, concedes that the trial court erred at Regan 

Foster’s sentencing hearing on several first- and second-degree felonies, because it 

failed to inform her of the Reagan Tokes Law notifications set forth in R.C. 

2929.19(B)(2)(c). Based upon this concession, the trial court’s judgment is reversed, and 
-2-

the case is remanded to the trial court for the sole purpose of resentencing Foster in 

accordance with R.C. 2929.19(B)(2)(c).

Facts and Procedural History

{¶ 2} In June 2021, a Clark County grand jury issued a 122-count indictment 

involving eight individuals; Foster was one of the defendants. Following plea 

negotiations, Foster pleaded guilty to engaging in a pattern of corrupt activity in violation 

of R.C. 2923.32(A)(1), a first-degree felony, three counts of aggravated trafficking in drugs 

in violation of R.C. 2925.03(A)(2), all second-degree felonies, and trafficking in fentanyl, 

also a second-degree felony. The remaining counts involving Foster were dismissed. 

The parties further agreed that two pending charges would not be presented to the grand 

jury and that Foster’s prison sentence would be 18-21 years, to be served consecutively 

to a prison term Foster was serving in a separate case. Finally, it was agreed that Foster 

would forfeit cash in the amount of $240. 

{¶ 3} Upon completing the plea hearing, the trial court immediately conducted the 

sentencing hearing. The trial court imposed the agreed-upon prison term, ordered 

forfeiture of the $240, and imposed a $7,500 fine on each trafficking count. The next 

day, the trial court filed a judgment entry of conviction. This appeal followed.

Analysis

{¶ 4} Foster was sentenced under the Reagan Tokes Law which, at R.C. 

2929.19(B)(2)(c), provides in relevant part as follows:
-3-

[I]f the sentencing court determines at the sentencing hearing that a prison 

term is necessary or required, the court shall do all of the following:

* * *

(c) If the prison term is a non-life felony indefinite prison term, notify the 

offender of all of the following:

(i) That it is rebuttably presumed that the offender will be released from 

service of the sentence on the expiration of the minimum prison term 

imposed as part of the sentence or on the offender's presumptive earned 

early release date, as defined in section 2967.271 of the Revised Code, 

whichever is earlier;

(ii) That the department of rehabilitation and correction may rebut the 

presumption described in division (B)(2)(c)(i) of this section if, at a hearing 

held under section 2967.271 of the Revised Code, the department makes 

specified determinations regarding the offender's conduct while confined, 

the offender's rehabilitation, the offender's threat to society, the offender's 

restrictive housing, if any, while confined, and the offender's security 

classification;

(iii) That if, as described in division (B)(2)(c)(ii) of this section, the 

department at the hearing makes the specified determinations and rebuts 

the presumption, the department may maintain the offender’s incarceration 

after the expiration of that minimum term or after that presumptive earned 

early release date for the length of time the department determines to be 
-4-

reasonable, subject to the limitation specified in section 2967.271 of the 

Revised Code;

(iv) That the department may make the specified determinations and 

maintain the offender's incarceration under the provisions described in 

divisions (B)(2)(c)(i) and (ii) of this section more than one time, subject to 

the limitation specified in section 2967.271 of the Revised Code;

(v) That if the offender has not been released prior to the expiration of the 

offender's maximum prison term imposed as part of the sentence, the 

offender must be released upon the expiration of that term.

{¶ 5} We have concluded that the above language requires the trial court to 

provide the R.C. 2929.19(B)(2)(c) notifications at the sentencing hearing. State v. 

Massie, 2d Dist. Clark No. 2020-CA-50, 2021-Ohio-3376, ¶ 22. We have further 

concluded that a trial court’s failure to provide the R.C. 2929.19(B)(2)(c) advisements at 

the sentencing hearing requires reversal of the judgment and a remand to the trial court 

for resentencing in accordance with R.C. 2929.19(B)(2)(c). Id. at ¶ 23, 25; State v. 

Thompson, 2d Dist. Clark No. 2020-CA-60, 2021-Ohio-4027, ¶ 29; State v. McMahon, 2d 

Dist. Montgomery No. 29268, 2022-Ohio-2806, ¶ 14. 

{¶ 6} Foster’s only assignment of error asserts that the trial court failed to provide 

the R.C. 2929.19(B)(2)(c) notifications at the sentencing hearing. And, as noted, the State 

concedes this error. Given this, Foster’s assignment of error will be sustained. 

Conclusion
-5-

{¶ 7} The judgment of the trial court is reversed, and the matter is remanded to the 

trial court for the sole purpose of resentencing Foster consistent with R.C. 

2929.19(B)(2)(c). 

. . . . . . . . . . . . .

WELBAUM, P.J. and EPLEY, J., concur.