VICTIM.
MR. MANCUSO: YOUR HONOR, FOR MR. GLASS'S PURPOSES, YOU WROTE EX-WIFE IS A PROBLEM. HE - THE COURT: YEAH, SHE'S A PROBLEM. YOU HAD INDICATED THAT SHE IS LIKELY TO CAUSE US GRIEF, SO THAT'S WHY I'VE WRITTEN SHE IS A PROBLEM.
MR. MANCUSO: OKAY. SO, IN OTHER WORDS, THEN THE COURT WILL CONSIDER ANY ALLEGATION MADE BY HER IN DUE COURSE IF THERE'S AN ALLEGED VIOLATION OF COMMUNITY CONTROL, CORRECT?
THE COURT: WELL, IT'LL HAVE TO RISE TO A LEVEL OF A CONVICTION BEFORE I GET EXCITED. * * *
(Tr. June 8, 2004, at 10-12.)
{¶ 8} On August 19, 2004, the trial court conducted the sentencing hearing. At the hearing, defense counsel described appellant as someone who, in his youth, "ran the streets, that was a troublemaker. I'll flat out say he was on the wrong path." (Tr. Aug. 19, 2004, at 6.) Counsel maintained, however, that appellant had turned his life around, and was currently a successful business owner.
{¶ 9} Defense counsel also raised the issue of the contents of the PSI report, stating in part:
YOUR HONOR, I READ THE PSI IN DETAIL, AND I KNOW THE COURT AND ALL THE PARTIES INVOLVED HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO READ IT TOO. GRANTED, IT DID NOT READ WELL.
HOWEVER, I THINK IT'S REAL IMPORTANT HERE - AND I KNOW TIM WANTS TO COMMENT ON IT - A LOT OF THE STUFF THAT DID NOT READ WELL OCCURRED PRIOR TO HIM CHANGING HIS LIFE AROUND. IT OCCURRED IN THE 1990'S. IT OCCURRED WHILE HE WAS MARRIED TO - IN A SITUATION THAT WAS NOT GOOD FOR HIM, THAT THE INCIDENTS THAT WERE RELATED IN THE PSI IN TERMS OF HIS RECORD WERE MANY INSTANCES THAT WERE, IN FACT, DISMISSED IN COURT AND PROBABLY WERE - ALL OF THEM, AS A MATTER OF FACT, EXCEPT ONE WERE MOTIVATED BY HIS EX-SPOUSE THAT HE IS DIVORCED FROM NOW.
NOW, YOUR HONOR, I KNOW THE COURT HAS GIVEN US A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF CONSIDERATION IN DISCUSSING THIS MATTER PRIOR TO THE PLEA AND ALSO PRIOR TO THE SENTENCING TODAY. WHAT'S DIFFICULT FOR TIM AS A DEFENDANT HERE IS HE ENTERED THE - THIS PLEA TO AVOID THE CONSEQUENCES OF TRIAL, AND WE WERE KIND OF GIVEN A COMMITMENT AS TO MAYBE WHAT THE COURT MIGHT DO.
THE COURT: YOU WERE GIVEN AN INDICATION OF WHAT THE COURT MIGHT DO.
MR. MANCUSO: AN INDICATION OF WHAT THE COURT MIGHT DO.
AFTER READING THE PSI AND AFTER READING A LOT OF THE PAST MATTERS THAT SHOWED UP IN THE PSI, THE COURT HAS INDICATED TO US IN PRESENTENCING DISCUSSIONS THAT THEY INTEND ON DOING A LITTLE MORE THAN WHAT WAS INDICATED AT THE PLEA HEARING. * * *
(Tr. Aug. 19, 2004, at 7-8.)
{¶ 10} Defense counsel then requested that appellant be provided the opportunity to speak, and the court granted that request. The court also heard several acquaintances of appellant speak on his behalf.
{¶ 11} The victim, Clark,