Youngstown Daily Legal News

Prescription drug user gets 20 years in prison for series of home break-ins

JESSICA SHAMBAUGH
Special to the Legal News
Published: October 23, 2013

A Seneca County appeals court ruled this week that consecutive prison sentences were properly ordered for a man who broke into several homes to fuel his prescription drug addiction.

The 3rd District Court of Appeals affirmed Nathan Barney’s 20-year prison sentence after determining that the Seneca County Court of Common Pleas made the required findings during sentencing.

Barney’s case stemmed from a series of home invasions in Seneca County that occurred in late 2011 and early 2012.

He was indicted on five counts of burglary in September 2012 and initially pleaded not guilty.

At a change of plea hearing in January 2013 Barney agreed to plead guilty to all charges and in exchange the state agreed not to prosecute him on a separate case in Tiffin.

The plea agreement did not include a sentencing recommendation. The common pleas court accepted Barney’s pleas and found him guilty.

The trial court held a sentencing hearing in February 2013 and several people testified.

“At the sentencing hearing, the prosecutor made a statement that for a period of months the city of Tiffin was ‘under siege’ from the series of burglaries perpetrated by Barney. According to the prosecutor, the burglaries changed the lives of those victims involved, and created ‘fear’ and ‘havoc’ in the community,” Judge Stephen Shaw wrote in his summary for the court.

At the conclusion of his statement, the prosecutor recommended consecutive sentences for a total of 28 years in prison.

On Barney’s behalf, two of his friends and co-workers gave statements that he was “a genuine, caring, hard-working team player” who “showed nothing but respect and kindness” to the elderly residents of the care center at which he had worked for four years.

Barney also gave a statement that his time in jail had helped him “get clean” from a prescription drug addiction and “get his mind right.”

He also apologized to his family and the victims he affected.

After hearing all of the statements, the trial court sentenced Barney to five years in prison on each of the four second-degree felonies, to be served consecutively, and 30 months on his third-degree felony, to be served concurrently.

The sentencing entry reflected an aggregate term of 20 years in prison and Barney appealed to the 3rd District.

“Specifically, Barney contends that the consecutive sentences were not supported by the purpose of the felony sentencing factors in R.C. 2929.11, and R.C. 2929.12,” Judge Shaw stated.

Initially, the three-judge appellate panel held that a trial court must made specific findings regarding an offender’s recidivism factors, threat to the community and the seriousness of the crime prior to issuing consecutive sentences.

The panel found that the common pleas court in Barney’s case specifically addressed all of those factors for each of his charges.

“In case No. 177 the court finds that the consecutive sentences are necessary to protect the public from future crime or to punish this defendant, and that consecutive sentences are not disproportionate to the seriousness of the defendant’s conduct and to the danger the defendant poses to the public,” the trial court stated during sentencing.

The trial court further stated that breaking into many structures was “bad” but “breaking into someone’s home — terrible. Horrible. Homes have been broken into. Items stolen. Peoples’ lives changed.”

The appellate court found that the trial court properly addressed all of the required factors and even gave reasoning to support its sentencing decision.

Still, Barney contended that his sentence was unfair because he had no prior criminal history, had steady employment, and only committed his offenses because of a drug addiction that he was trying to overcome.

“Despite these arguments, the trial court’s sentence was authorized by law, the trial court explicitly stated that it had considered the applicable statutes both at the sentencing hearing and in the judgment entry of sentencing, and the trial court was within its discretion to sentence Barney to consecutive sentences,” Shaw stated.

The judges held that Barney’s sentence was less than that which was recommended by the prosecutor and less than that allowed by Ohio law.

They also maintained that the evidence in the record, including statements that Barney’s actions created an atmosphere of fear within the community and that one of his victims was an 82-year-old woman who woke up during the burglary, supported the trial court’s decision.

“For the foregoing reasons, Barney’s assignment of error is overruled and the judgment of the Seneca County Common Pleas Court is affirmed.”

Presiding Judge Vernon Preston and Judge Richard Rogers joined Shaw to form the majority.

The case is cited State v. Barney, 2013-Ohio-4562.

[Back]