The Akron Legal News

Consecutive sentences for robber upheld

ANNIE YAMSON
Special to the Legal News
Published: August 28, 2014

A panel of judges in the 6th District Court of Appeals recently ruled that the Lucas County Court of Common Pleas properly ordered a defendant’s sentence to run consecutive to a separate sanction imposed in another county.

Wesley Jude appealed the decision of the lower court, arguing that it failed to make the findings required by R.C. 2929.14.

Jude’s conviction stemmed from a robbery that took place during the early morning hours of Aug. 15, 2012.

On that date, Jude and three other men approached two females, Brandy Fasnaogh and Thea Grabiec, and asked them for directions. At the time, the girls were standing beside Grabiec’s Honda.

Upon learning that the Honda belonged to one of the women, Jude brandished a gun and proceeded to rob Fasnaogh and Grabiec. According to the victims, Jude pointed a gun at Grabiec’s chest and stated “give me everything you have.”

The women were ordered to lay on the ground while Jude explained to them that he would kill them if they called the police. Meanwhile, Jude’s accomplices were busy going through the victims’ pockets and took Grabiec’s keys, wallet and cell phone.

After the robbery, Jude and his accomplices drove off in Grabiec’s car with Jude at the wheel.

Later that morning, Toledo police spotted the stolen automobile and attempted to initiate a traffic stop. Jude, however, refused to stop and a pursuit began, but the chase ended when Jude lost control of the vehicle.

Upon his arrest, police learned that Jude had stolen the handgun he used to commit the robbery from his father.

The father informed police that Jude was subject to electronic monitoring as a term of his bond in a case that was pending in Wood County. According to his father, Jude had removed his electronic monitor without permission earlier that morning.

A subsequent indictment charged Jude with two counts of aggravated robbery with firearm specifications and one count of failure to comply with an order or signal of a police officer.

In exchange for his guilty plea to one count of aggravated robbery with a firearm specification and the failure to comply charge, the state agreed to dismiss the remaining charges.

Prior to sentencing, Jude entered a guilty plea in the Wood County case to two counts of theft of a motor vehicle and three counts of complicity to burglary.

In that case, the Wood County court ordered that Jude serve an aggregate prison term of eight years.

Approximately two months later, the Lucas County court imposed consecutive sentences for a total 11 years in prison. It ordered the sentence to be served consecutive to the one imposed in Wood County, resulting in a final sentence of 19 years of incarceration.

In justifying its decision, the Lucas County court noted in open court that Jude poses a great danger to the public and that he was on bond when he committed his offenses.

“We further find that the harm caused was so great and unusual that a single prison term for any one of these offenses committed as part of any of the courses of conduct would not adequately reflect the seriousness of the offender’s conduct,” the trial court stated, noting that Jude had a lengthy criminal history that also called for consecutive sentences.

The trial court reiterated its findings in its judgment entry.

Upon its review of the record, the 6th District’s three-judge appellate panel sided with the state in finding that the Lucas County court engaged in the proper statutory analysis when determining whether Jude’s sentences should run consecutively.

“Notably, the trial court is not required to recite any ‘magic’ or ‘talismanic’ words when imposing consecutive sentences provided it is clear from the record that the trial court engaged in the appropriate analysis,” wrote Presiding Judge Stephen Yarbrough on behalf of the appellate panel.

Judge Yarbrough cited the trial judge’s statements during Jude’s sentencing hearing, where he pointed out that Jude’s actions could have led to escalated violence.

“(This) is the kind of offense that when a victim is faced with a firearm, we have seen the horrible, devastating and eternal consequences of same where the victim is facing the firearm and the robber chooses to take their life,” the trial court stated. “Thank heavens that this didn’t occur in this case, but everything else leads up to such violence.”

In addition to its statements during the sentencing hearing, Judge Yarbrough pointed out that the trial court noted its findings in the judgment entry.

“Because the sentencing entry is this case recites the trial court’s R.C. 2929.14 findings, which are supported by the sentencing record, we hold that the trial court’s imposition of consecutive sentences was not clearly and convincingly contrary to law,” wrote Judge Yarbrough.

As a result of the panel’s holding, the judgment of the Lucas County court was affirmed with judges Mark Pietrykowski and James Jenson concurring.

[Back]