[Cite as State v. Grady, 2017-Ohio-7849.]
STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
)ss: NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
COUNTY OF SUMMIT )
STATE OF OHIO C.A. No. 27626
Appellee
v. APPEAL FROM JUDGMENT
ENTERED IN THE
MICHAEL GRADY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
COUNTY OF SUMMIT, OHIO
Appellant CASE No. CR 11 09 2460 (A)
DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY
Dated: September 27, 2017
CARR, Judge.
{¶1} Appellant, Michael Grady, appeals the judgment of the Summit County Court of
Common Pleas. This Court affirms.
I.
{¶2} After a wave of break-ins that occurred in 2011, the Summit County Grand Jury
indicted Grady on 40 criminal offenses. After pleading not guilty to the charges at arraignment,
Grady eventually reached a plea agreement with the State and pleaded guilty to ten counts of
breaking and entering. The trial court imposed a one-year term of incarceration on each count
and ordered the sentences to run consecutively for a combined prison term of ten years. In 2013,
Grady successfully moved this Court for leave to file a delayed appeal. This Court reversed
Grady’s sentence on the basis that the State breached the terms of the plea agreement when it
failed to inform the trial court at sentencing that Grady had cooperated with investigations into
other break-ins in the area. State v. Grady, 9th Dist. Summit No. 26979, 2014-Ohio-3475.
2
{¶3} On remand, the trial court held a status conference on December 2, 2014. Grady
waived the opportunity to withdraw his former guilty pleas entered on January 10, 2012. The
matter proceeded to resentencing where the trial court sentenced Grady to nine months in prison
for each offense and ordered those sentences to run consecutively. The trial court issued its
sentencing entry on December 15, 2014. Grady filed a timely notice of appeal. While Grady
filed a praecipe for the court reporter to prepare a transcript of the resentencing hearing, he
subsequently filed a motion for preparation of a complete transcript at the State’s expense. The
trial court denied the motion. On March 30, 2015, this Court issued a journal entry dismissing
Grady’s appeal pursuant to App.R. 18(C) due to the fact that he failed to file an appellate brief.
{¶4} Almost two years later, Grady filed a motion to reopen his appeal based upon a
conditional writ of habeas corpus granted by the United States District Court for the Northern
District of Ohio Eastern Division. This Court issued a journal entry granting the motion and
appointing appellate counsel on February 28, 2017. This Court further specified that “the
January 8, 2015, notice of filing the record is stricken. The record will now be due 40 days from
journalization of this order.” State v. Grady, 9th Dist. Summit No. 27626 (Feb. 28, 2017).
When appellate counsel subsequently withdrew, this Court issued a journal entry on March 22,
2017, wherein we appointed new counsel and specified that the record would be due 40 days
from the journalization of the order.
{¶5} On appeal, Grady raises one assignment of error.
II.
ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR
APPELLANT’S CONSECUTIVE SENTENCES DO NOT CONFORM WITH
OHIO SENTENCING STATUTE [R.C.] 2929.11(A) AND CONTRAVENE ITS
INTENDED PURPOSE.
3
{¶6} In his sole assignment of error, Grady argues that the trial court erred by imposing
consecutive sentences in this case. While Grady concedes that the trial court “did apply all the
requisite language pursuant to []R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) in its journal entry[,]” he contends that the
trial court’s decision to impose consecutive sentences does not comport with the purposes of
felony sentencing. We disagree.
{¶7} This Court cannot reach the merits of Grady’s assignment of error. Under
circumstances such as this where the appellant has not provided a complete record to facilitate
our review, we must presume regularity in the trial court’s proceedings and affirm. State v.
Jalwan, 9th Dist. Medina No. 09CA0065-M, 2010-Ohio-3001, ¶ 12, citing Knapp v. Edwards
Labs., 61 Ohio St.2d 197, 199 (1980). While the appellate record contains a copy of the
transcript from the plea colloquy as well as a transcript from the original sentencing hearing,
Grady has failed to provide this Court with a transcript from the resentencing hearing. Grady has
further not provided this Court with the presentence investigation report in this case. Under
these circumstances, where Grady argues that his sentence does not comport with the purposes of
felony sentencing, this Court must presume regularity in the trial court’s proceedings and affirm.
See State v. Galloway, 9th Dist. Summit No. 19752, 2001 WL 81257, *6 (2001).
{¶8} Grady’s assignment of error is overruled.
III.
{¶9} Grady’s assignment of error is overruled. The judgment of the Summit County
Court of Common Pleas is affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
There were reasonable grounds for this appeal.
4
We order that a special mandate issue out of this Court, directing the Court of Common
Pleas, County of Summit, State of Ohio, to carry this judgment into execution. A certified copy
of this journal entry shall constitute the mandate, pursuant to App.R. 27.
Immediately upon the filing hereof, this document shall constitute the journal entry of
judgment, and it shall be file stamped by the Clerk of the Court of Appeals at which time the
period for review shall begin to run. App.R. 22(C). The Clerk of the Court of Appeals is
instructed to mail a notice of entry of this judgment to the parties and to make a notation of the
mailing in the docket, pursuant to App.R. 30.
Costs taxed to Appellant.
DONNA J. CARR
FOR THE COURT
SCHAFER, P. J.
CALLAHAN, J.
CONCUR.
APPEARANCES:
ELI R. HELLER, Attorney at Law, for Appellant.
SHERRI BEVAN WALSH, Prosecuting Attorney, and RICHARD S. KASAY, Assistant
Prosecuting Attorney, for Appellee.
State v. Grady
Combined Opinion