Court Opinion

ID: 9931364
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-08 20:07:45.601369+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:17:29.980059
License: Public Domain

[Cite as State v. Loveless, 2024-Ohio-457.]

                                COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO

                              EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
                                 COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA

STATE OF OHIO,                                      :

                 Plaintiff-Appellee,                :
                                                             No. 112809
                 v.                                 :

DAMIEN E. LOVELESS,                                 :

                 Defendant-Appellant.               :

                                JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION

                 JUDGMENT: AFFIRMED
                 RELEASED AND JOURNALIZED: February 8, 2024

          Criminal Appeal from the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas
                              Case No. CR-21-664342-A

                                              Appearances:

                 Michael C. O’Malley, Cuyahoga County Prosecuting
                 Attorney, and Anna M. Faraglia, Assistant Prosecuting
                 Attorney, for appellee.

                 Cullen Sweeney, Cuyahoga County Public Defender, and
                 John T. Martin, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.

FRANK DANIEL CELEBREZZE, III, J.:

                Appellant Damien E. Loveless (“appellant”) brings this appeal

challenging his sentence by the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas under the

Reagan Tokes Law. After a thorough review, we affirm the judgment of the trial

court.
                              I. Procedural History

             As appellant notes in his brief, the underlying substantive facts of this

matter are not pertinent to the instant appeal, which only relates to the validity of

appellant’s sentence. Appellant pled guilty in three separate cases to one count of

involuntary manslaughter, a felony of the first degree, in violation of R.C. 2903.04,

with an accompanying firearm specification; and two counts of robbery, felonies of

the third degree, in violation of R.C. 2911.01(A)(3).

             Under the Reagan Tokes Law, which applied to the involuntary

manslaughter conviction, the trial court sentenced appellant to an aggregate,

indefinite sentence of six to nine years. Appellant then filed the instant appeal,

raising one assignment of error for our review:

      S.B. 201 (Reagan Tokes) violates the Sixth Amendment right to trial by
      jury and Fourteenth Amendment due process.

                               II. Law and Analysis

             Appellant contends that the trial court erred in sentencing him to an

indefinite sentence under the Reagan Tokes Law. Under this law, qualifying first-

and second-degree felonies committed on or after March 22, 2019, are subject to the

imposition of indefinite sentences. Appellant contends that the Reagan Tokes Law

violates his constitutional rights to a trial by jury and due process.

             Appellant acknowledges that the Supreme Court of Ohio’s decision in

State v. Hacker, Slip Opinion No. 2023-Ohio-2535, upholding the constitutionality

of the Reagan Tokes Law, is controlling in this matter. Nevertheless, he presents his
arguments as to why Hacker was incorrectly decided. We find that the arguments

presented in this case do not present novel issues or any new theory challenging the

constitutional validity of any aspect of the Reagan Tokes Law left unaddressed by

the Supreme Court of Ohio’s decision in Hacker. Accordingly, we overrule

appellant’s sole assignment of error.

            Judgment affirmed.

      It is ordered that appellee recover from appellant 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 execution of sentence.

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

of the Rules of Appellate Procedure.

FRANK DANIEL CELEBREZZE, III, JUDGE

KATHLEEN ANN KEOUGH, A.J., and
SEAN C. GALLAGHER, J., CONCUR