[Cite as State v. Brown, 2013-Ohio-4328.]
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO
BUTLER COUNTY
STATE OF OHIO, :
Plaintiff-Appellee, : CASE NO. CA2012-12-249
: OPINION
- vs - 9/30/2013
:
STANLEY BROWN, :
Defendant-Appellant. :
CRIMINAL APPEAL FROM BUTLER COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
Case No. CR10-12-1966
Michael T. Gmoser, Butler County Prosecuting Attorney, Lina N. Alkamhawi, Government
Services Center, 315 High Street, 11th Floor, Hamilton, Ohio 45011, for plaintiff-appellee
Stanley Brown, #A614-974, Lebanon Correctional Institution, P.O. Box 56, Lebanon, Ohio
45036, defendant-appellant, pro se
RINGLAND, J.
{¶ 1} Defendant-appellant, Stanley Brown, appeals a decision of the Butler County
Court of Common Pleas overruling his petition for postconviction relief.
{¶ 2} On September 29, 2011, Brown was convicted of two counts of rape, felonies
of the first degree. The first count included a specification that the victim was under ten
years of age at the time of the offense. Brown was sentenced to life with the possibility of
Butler CA2012-12-249
parole after ten years for the first count, to be served concurrently with a ten-year prison term
for the second count.
{¶ 3} Brown appealed his convictions and sentence to this court. State v. Brown,
12th Dist. Butler No. CA2011-11-207, 2013-Ohio-1610. While that appeal was pending,
Brown filed a petition for postconviction relief on May 21, 2012, seeking to vacate or set aside
his conviction and sentence. Neither the state nor the trial court was served with Brown's
petition for postconviction relief. On November 1, 2012, Brown filed a motion to supplement
his petition. On November 6, 2012, the trial court denied Brown's petition and motion to
supplement the petition.
{¶ 4} Brown now appeals that decision, raising three assignments of error for our
review.
{¶ 5} Assignment of Error No. 1:
{¶ 6} TRIAL COUNSEL WAS INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL IN
VIOLATION OF THE SIXTH AND FOURTEENTH AMENDMENTS TO THE UNITED
STATE'S CONSTITUTION AND ARTICLE 1 SECTION 10 OF THE OHIO CONSTITUTION,
FOR FAILING TO DEMONSTRATE TO THE JURY DEFENDANT'S WAS INCARCERATED
DURING THE TIME FRAME SET OUT IN THE SPECIFIC BILL OF PARTICULAR. [SIC]
{¶ 7} Assignment of Error No. 2:
{¶ 8} TRIAL COUNSEL WAS INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL. IN
VIOLATION OF THE SIXTH AND FOURTEENTH AMENDMENTS TO THE UNITED
STATE'S CONSTITUTION AND ARTICLE 1 SECTION 10 OF THE OHIO CONSTITUTION.
[SIC]
{¶ 9} Assignment of Error No. 3:
{¶ 10} TRIAL COUNSEL WAS CONSTITUTIONALLY DEFICIENT BY FAILING TO
-2-
Butler CA2012-12-249
USE A MATERIAL WITNESS AT THE BEHEST OF DEFENDANT, RESULTING IN
DEPRIVATION OF SIXTH & FOURTEENTH AMENDMENTS. [SIC]
{¶ 11} The state acknowledges that the trial court failed to make findings of fact and
conclusions of law when denying Brown's timely petition for postconviction relief. R.C.
2953.21(C) explicitly requires that the trial court must make such findings of fact and
conclusions of law. The purpose of such a rule is to "appraise petitioner of the grounds for
the judgment of the trial court and to enable the appellate courts to properly determine
appeals in such a cause." State v. McMullen, 12th Dist. Butler No. CA2006-04-086, 2007-
Ohio-125, ¶ 20, quoting State v. Mapson, 1 Ohio St.3d 217, 218 (1982).
{¶ 12} The findings of fact and conclusions of law should be "'explicit enough to give
the appellate court a clear understanding of the basis of the trial court's decision, and to
enable it to determine the ground on which the trial court reached its decision.'" (Citation
omitted.) State v. Clemmons, 58 Ohio App.3d 45, 46 (2d Dist.1989), quoted in State v.
Saylor, 125 Ohio App.3d 636, 639 (12th Dist.1998).
{¶ 13} It is clear that the trial court's failure to issue findings of fact and conclusions of
law as required by R.C. 2953.21(C) constituted reversible error. Accordingly, we remand this
cause to the trial court to either (1) make findings of fact and conclusions of law, pursuant to
R.C. 2953.21(C), in support of its dismissal of Brown's petition for postconviction relief or (2)
hold a hearing on Brown's petition pursuant to R.C. 2953.21(E).
{¶ 14} In light of the foregoing, having found that the trial court failed to make the
required findings of fact and conclusions of law in denying Brown's timely petition for
postconviction relief, we decline to rule on Brown's assignments of error at this time. See
App.R. 12(A)(1)(c).
{¶ 15} The trial court's judgment is reversed, and this cause is remanded for further
-3-
Butler CA2012-12-249
proceedings consistent with this opinion and in accordance with the law of this state.
HENDRICKSON, P.J., and S. POWELL, J., concur.
-4-
State v. Brown
Combined Opinion