[Cite as State v. Slaughter, 2017-Ohio-387.]

Court of Appeals of Ohio

EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT 

COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA 

JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION 

No. 104391

STATE OF OHIO

PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE 

vs. 

GERALD L. SLAUGHTER

DEFENDANT-APPELLANT 

JUDGMENT:

AFFIRMED IN PART; 

REVERSED IN PART

Criminal Appeal from the 

Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas 

Case Nos. CR-14-585090-A and CR-15-602216-A 

BEFORE: E.T. Gallagher, P.J., S. Gallagher, J., and Celebrezze, J. 

RELEASED AND JOURNALIZED: February 2, 2017 
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT

Robert L. Tobik 

Cuyahoga County Public Defender 

BY: John T. Martin 

Assistant Public Defender 

Courthouse Square, Suite 200 

310 Lakeside Avenue 

Cleveland, Ohio 44113 

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE

Michael C. O’Malley 

Cuyahoga County Prosecutor 

BY: Frank Romeo Zeleznikar 

Assistant Prosecuting Attorney 

The Justice Center, 9th Floor 

1200 Ontario Street 

Cleveland, Ohio 44113 
EILEEN T. GALLAGHER, P.J.: 

{¶1} Defendant-appellant, Gerald Slaughter (“Slaughter”), appeals his sentence 

and raises the following three assignments of error: 

1. In 2014, Mr. Slaughter was illegally placed on community control 

sanctions for Count five in CR 585090; accordingly, he could not be 

punished for a violation of those community control sanctions in 2016. 

2. Mr. Slaughter could not be sentenced to 18 months imprisonment on 

Count five in CR 585090 when the trial court never advised him that a 

violation of community control sanctions could result in an 18 month 

sentence. 

3. Assuming arguendo that Mr. Slaughter could be placed on community 

control sanctions in CR 585090, the jail time credit for CR 602216 was 

required to be 261 days, not the 77 days credited. 

{¶2} We find merit to the appeal affirm in part and reverse in part. 

I. Facts and Procedural History

{¶3} In Cuyahoga C.P. No. CR-14-585090-A, Slaughter pleaded guilty to one 

count of burglary, one count of domestic violence, and one count of menacing by 

stalking. The court sentenced Slaughter to 12 months in prison on the burglary 

conviction and 18 months in jail on the domestic violence conviction, to be served 

concurrently with the 12-month prison term. The court also sentenced Slaughter to three 

years of community control sanctions on the menacing by stalking conviction, to be 

served consecutive to the two terms of incarceration on the other charges. The 

sentencing entry provided that Slaughter could be sentenced to prison for 18 months if he 

violated the terms of the community control sanctions. 
{¶4} Slaughter later pleaded guilty to one count of failure to provide notice of 

change of address in Cuyahoga C.P. No. CR-15-602216-A, and the court sentenced 

Slaughter to nine months in prison in that case. The court also sentenced Slaughter to 18 

months in prison for violating the terms of his community control sanctions in Case No. 

CR-14-585090-A. He now appeals his 18-month prison sentence. 

II. Law and Analysis

{¶5} In the first assignment of error, Slaughter argues he could not be sentenced to 

18 months in prison for a community control violation because the court lacked authority 

to sentence him to community control sanctions on his menacing by stalking conviction. 

We agree. 

{¶6} In State v. Anderson, 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 102427, 2016-Ohio-7044, ¶ 29, 

an en banc majority of this court recently held that a trial court lacks authority to impose 

community control sanctions to be served consecutive to a prison term. The sentence in 

this case is the same type of hybrid sentence Anderson addresses. Because the trial court 

could not legally sentence Slaughter to community control sanctions to be served 

consecutive to the prison terms on the burglary and domestic violence counts, the 

community control sanctions portion of his sentence was void and must be vacated. 

State v. Horner, 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 103719, 2016-Ohio-7608, ¶ 12. 

{¶7} The court erred in finding Slaughter in violation of community control 

sanctions because the community control sanctions were unlawfully imposed. Therefore, 

the first assignment of error is sustained. 
{¶8} Having determined the imposition of community control sanctions was void, 

the second and third assignments of error, which also challenge the validity of the 

community control sanctions, are moot. 

{¶9} The trial court’s judgment is affirmed in part and reversed in part. All of 

Slaughter’s convictions as well as the sentences on his burglary and domestic violence 

convictions in Case No. CR-14-585090-A are affirmed. The imposition of community 

control sanctions on Slaughter’s menacing by stalking conviction and the 18-month 

prison term imposed on the community control violation in CR-14-585090-A are hereby 

reversed. 

It is ordered that appellant recover from appellee costs herein taxed. 

The court finds there were reasonable grounds for this appeal. 

It is ordered that a special mandate issue out of this court directing the common 

pleas court to carry this judgment into execution. The defendant’s conviction having 

been affirmed, any bail pending appeal is terminated. Case remanded to the trial court 

for modification and execution of sentence. 

A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to Rule 27 of 

the Rules of Appellate Procedure. 

EILEEN T. GALLAGHER, PRESIDING JUDGE 

SEAN C. GALLAGHER, J., and 

FRANK D. CELEBREZZE, JR., J., CONCUR