[Cite as State v. Robinson, 2017-Ohio-4168.]
STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS )ss: NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF SUMMIT )
STATE OF OHIO C.A. No. 28278
Appellee
v. APPEAL FROM JUDGMENT ENTERED IN THE JACKIE N. ROBINSON COURT OF COMMON PLEAS COUNTY OF SUMMIT, OHIO Appellant CASE No. CR 79 03 0319 A
DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY
Dated: June 7, 2017
HENSAL, Presiding Judge.
{¶1} Jackie Robinson appeals an order of the Summit County Court of Common Pleas
that denied his motion to correct sentencing. For the following reasons, this Court affirms.
I.
{¶2} In 1979, a jury found Mr. Robinson guilty of aggravated robbery, carrying a
concealed weapon, and having a weapon under disability. The trial court sentenced him to a
combined term of nine to forty years imprisonment. On appeal, this Court upheld his conviction
and sentence. In subsequent years, Mr. Robinson filed a series of motions, requesting that his
convictions be set aside or his sentence corrected. The trial court denied each of his motions. At
issue in this appeal is a motion to correct sentence that Mr. Robinson filed on May 12, 2016.
The trial court denied it without explanation on May 23, 2016. Mr. Robinson has timely
appealed, assigning 16 errors, which this court will address together.
II.
ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR I
WAS IT ERROR TO CONTINUE TO PROSECUTE MR. ROBINSON AFTER THE DISMISSAL OF THE INDICTMENT BY THE MUNICIPAL COURT.
ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR II
WAS IT ERROR TO SECRETLY INDICT MR. ROBINSON UNDER THE CAREER CRIMINAL PROGRAM, WHEN KNOWING THAT HE DID NOT FALL WITHIN THE CRITERIA.
ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR III
WAS IT ERROR TO PUT MR. ROBINSON TO TRIAL AFTER THE COURT GRANTED A MOTION TO SUPPRESS THE INDICTMENT, AND DISMISS[ED] THE CASE.
ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR IV
WAS IT ERROR FOR THE STATE TO MANUFACTURE A BOGUS INDICTMENT, STATING THAT IT WAS SWORN TO UNDER OATH, SIGNED AND RETURNED BY MEMBERS OF THE GRAND JURY.
ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR V
WAS IT ERROR TO THE PREJUDICE OF MR. ROBINSON FOR [THE] TRIAL COURT TO VIOLATE THE MANDATORY PROCEDURES OF OHIO CRIM. R. 6(C)(D)(F)(E).
ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR VI
WAS IT ERROR TO THE PREJUDICE OF MR. ROBINSON FOR THE TRIAL JUDGE AND DEFENSE COUNSEL TO WAIVE AWAY MR. ROBINSON['S] RIGHTS UNDER THE U. S. CONST.
ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR VII
WAS IT ERROR TO DISREGARD THE MANDATORY DUTY OF THE COURT TO CONSIDER THE FACTORS SET FORTH IN 2929.12(A)(B)(C), AND NOT STATE THE COURT['S] REASONS IN THE JOURNAL ENTRY FOR IMPOSING MAXIMUM AND CONSECUTIVE SENTENCES FOR ACTS STEMMING FROM ONE CRIME.
ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR VIII
WAS IT ERROR FOR THE TRIAL COURT TO VIOLATE A [MANDATED] SENTENCING [STATUTE], PURSUANT TO OHIO REV. CODE ANN. § 2947.051.
ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR IX
WAS IT ERROR FOR THE TRIAL COURT TO IMPOSE INDEFINITE SENTENCES FOR THIRD AND FOURTH DEGREE FELONIES WITHOUT LEGAL CAUSE.
ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR X
WAS IT ERROR FOR THE TRIAL COURT TO IMPOSE COST[S] AND FINES, AFTER FINDING DEFENDANT INDIGENT, AND NOT INFORM