The Akron Legal News

Prison term set for man with multiple probation violations

JESSICA SHAMBAUGH
Special to the Legal News
Published: October 2, 2014

In a recently released opinion, the 3rd District Court of Appeals affirmed a 23-month prison sentence for a man who violated his community control sanctions numerous times.

Cameron Knerr appealed the Auglaize County Court of Common Pleas’ judgment and argued it erred by failing to bifurcate his hearing and by not finding he was entrapped into violating his probation conditions.

The facts of the case state that Knerr pleaded guilty for safecracking and breaking and entering in 2009.

The trial court sentenced him to five years of community control for those violations.

About two years later, in December 2011, Knerr was indicted on charges of trafficking in marijuana in the vicinity of a juvenile and trafficking in drugs.

Pursuant to a plea agreement, Knerr pleaded guilty to trafficking in drugs and the remaining count was dismissed.

The trial court sentenced him to five years of community control in that case and warned him that if he violated the terms of his probation he would be subject to 18 months in prison.

The state later moved to revoke Knerr’s community control in the first case, but ultimately dismissed that motion.

The following year, the state moved again to revoke Knerr’s community control in the first case.

It asserted that Knerr violated the terms of his community control by consuming alcohol, misusing 911, failing to inform his supervising officer of his address and testing positive for marijuana and cocaine.

Knerr admitted to violating those terms and the trial court subsequently sentenced him to a 23-month prison term.

Two months later, however, the trial court granted Knerr’s motion for judicial release and imposed a term of five years of supervision.

In February 2013, the state again moved to revoke Knerr’s community control in both cases.

This time, it alleged Knerr violated the terms of his release by resisting arrest, drinking alcohol and being present in a place where alcohol is served.

Knerr again admitted to the violations and the trial court imposed a five-year term of community control.

Earlier this year, the state moved to revoke Knerr’s community control in both of his cases.

It reported that Knerr had violated the terms of his community control again by being present where alcohol was served, consuming alcohol, associating with someone with a criminal background and refusing to give a police officer the code to unlock his cell phone.

At a hearing on the matter, Knerr admitted to those violations and moved for a continuance so that his psychologist could finish a report about his alcohol dependency. The trial court denied that request and proceeded to sentencing.

During the sentencing hearing, Knerr testified he had participated in several controlled drug buys for the Drug Task Force and struggled with alcoholism during all of those buys.

He told the court he never had any training on the effects of alcohol, but testified about treatment programs he participated in.

The trial court then established that he underwent treatment while he was in the Central Ohio Youth Center, where he discussed a troubled childhood and alcohol dependency.

Nevertheless, the trial court imposed consecutive prison terms for both cases, for a total of 23 months in prison.

On appeal, Knerr first argued that his community control revocation hearing should have been bifurcated so that his psychologist could finish his report.

He claimed the report could have explained that he was an alcoholic and provided mitigation.

The three-judge appellate panel found that argument unconvincing.

“Knerr was able to testify as to his alcoholism and how it impacted his behavior. He also testified that (his psychologist) told him that he abuses alcohol to treat his underlying pain caused from childhood abuse. Thus, Knerr was not prejudiced because he was able to testify as to his alcoholism and also testify as to some of (the doctor’s) conclusions,” Judge Richard Rogers wrote for the court.

The panel determined that the trial court took Knerr’s struggles into consideration, but gave it little weight because he had knowledge of his alcohol dependency but chose not to do anything to treat the problem.

The trial court noted that although Knerr participated in treatment groups while he was detained, he did not pursue treatment after his release.

“Knerr has been aware of his alcohol problems for several years and has been given numerous chances for rehabilitation and squanders each opportunity. The trial court is under no such obligation to extend yet another attempt at treatment,” Judge Rogers stated, overruling Knerr’s first assignment of error.

Knerr next argued that he was entrapped into violating his probation by working for the Drug Task Force.

“We are unsure what Knerr is arguing in this assignment of error,” Judge Rogers wrote, noting that Knerr could have been arguing as an affirmative defense or as mitigation.

“Regardless of what Knerr is arguing in this assignment of error, this claim was not litigated in the trial court, and therefore, we will not address it on appeal,” Judge Rogers continued.

Presiding Judge John Willamowski and Vernon Preston joined Rogers in affirming the lower court’s ruling.

The case is cited State v. Knerr, 2014-Ohio-3988.

[Back]