Youngstown Daily Legal News

Heroin dealer loses appeal of prison sentence after multiple probation violations

ANNIE YAMSON
Special to the Legal News
Published: March 18, 2016

A panel of three judges in the 12th District Court of Appeals recently overruled the appeal of man who was sentenced to prison after violating the terms of his probation multiple times.

The defendant, Randy Davis, challenged the judgment of the Warren County Court of Common Pleas which revoked his community control and imposed a prison term.

Case summary states that Davis was convicted of trafficking in heroin in 2010 and sentenced to three years of community control.

In 2012, a community control violation was filed after Davis was arrested for domestic violence and violations of a protection order.

According to court documents, Davis was separately indicted for the felony domestic violence offense and later pleaded guilty to the charge and to a community control violation with respect to the heroin trafficking case.

Ultimately, the trial court continued the original community control and ordered three more years for the domestic violence case.

As a condition of the community-based probation, Davis was ordered to successfully complete an in-patient mental health program.

In 2014, Davis was arrested for criminal damaging and another community control violation was filed.

Again, the trial court continued the community control sanction.

Then, in August 2015, Davis received yet another violation involving allegations that he was convicted of drug abuse, tested positive for a synthetic drug called “spice” and had unauthorized contact with law enforcement by serving as a confidential informant without court approval.

At the hearing that followed, Davis’ counsel initially indicated that his client intended to admit to the community control violations.

However, Davis later said that he wished to plead not guilty by reason of insanity because he didn’t understand what was happening — he was using drugs at the time and had “50,000 things going through (his) head right now.”

Defense counsel subsequently moved for a competency evaluation which was denied by the trial court.

In the end, the court imposed a prison sentence of 16 months in the trafficking case and a concurrent 10 months for the domestic violence case.

In his appeal from that decision, Davis raised two assignments of error, the first of which challenged the trial court’s refusal to grant a competency hearing.

“Not all protections afforded in a criminal trial apply to revocation proceedings,” Judge Robert Ringland wrote on behalf of the court of appeals. “For example, the Ohio Rules of Evidence do not apply, there is no right to a jury trial and the privilege against self-incrimination is not available to a probationer.

“In addition, the decision whether to grant a hearing on competency at a revocation hearing is within the sound discretion of the trial court and must be determined on a case-by-case basis.”

The appellate panel noted that Davis did not request a competency hearing until after the revocation hearing had begun and, prior to the request, Davis’ attorney stated that his client was prepared to admit guilt.

However, Davis apparently changed his mind and said that he was “going to plead insanity on this because it’s not right.”

Davis also told the trial court, “I don’t understand how you’re all doing this, I don’t understand it at all.”

In response, the trial court carefully went over the proceedings with Davis and he said that he understood, leading the trial court to deny the request for a competency hearing.

Later, Davis told the court, “I don’t know, I took a lot of drugs today and I just don’t understand. I mean, I understand what you’re saying because — but there’s like 50,000 things going through my head right now. I don’t know what to say.”

“Upon review of the record, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying Davis’ request for a competency hearing,” Ringland wrote. “Here, the record is clear that after Davis stated that he did not ‘understand how you’re all doing this,’ the trial court explained the proceeding and the procedures going forward.”

According to the record, Davis demonstrated his understanding on two separate occasions.

“Simply, the trial court could properly determine whether the situation warranted further investigation into Davis’ competency,” Ringland wrote. “The record does not support Davis’ contention that he was incompetent and the decision by the trial court was not an abuse of discretion.”

In his second assignment of error, Davis contended that the trial court erred when it sentenced him to prison because it did not weigh the mitigating factors and aggravating circumstances.

The court of appeal found the opposite to be true.

“Contrary to Davis’ argument on appeal, the trial court did balance the appropriate factors in deciding to impose a term of incarceration,” Ringland wrote. “As the trial court noted, Davis had repeatedly violated the terms of his community control and had been given ample opportunity to correct his behavior.”

The appellate panel sided with the trial court in ruling that the prison term was “consistent with the purposes and principles of sentencing” and it overruled Davis’ second and final assignment of error.

The judgment of the Warren County court was affirmed with Presiding Judge Michael Powell and Judge Robert Hendrickson joining Ringland to form the majority.

The case is cited State v. Davis, 2016-Ohio-879.

[Back]