State v. Golston

Decision Date20 December 1994
Docket NumberNo. 93-1632,93-1632
Citation643 N.E.2d 109,71 Ohio St.3d 224
PartiesThe STATE of Ohio, Appellee, v. GOLSTON, Appellant.
CourtOhio Supreme Court

SYLLABUS BY THE COURT

A person convicted of a felony has a substantial stake in the judgment of conviction which survives the satisfaction of the judgment imposed upon him or her. Therefore, an appeal challenging a felony conviction is not moot even if the entire sentence has been satisfied before the matter is heard on appeal. (State v. Wilson [1975], 41 Ohio St.2d 236, 70 O.O.2d 431, 325 N.E.2d 236, and State v. Berndt [1987], 29 Ohio St.3d 3, 29 OBR 173, 504 N.E.2d 712, distinguished; State v. Williams [1992], 80 Ohio App.3d 542, 609 N.E.2d 1307, disapproved.)

On February 13, 1991, Otis Golston III, appellant, was indicted on two counts of motor vehicle grand theft in violation of R.C. 2913.02 (felonies of the third degree), and two counts of possession of criminal tools in violation of R.C. 2923.24 (felonies of the fourth degree). The events giving rise to the indictment involved "key switch" scams whereby appellant had allegedly posed as a customer at two car dealerships in Euclid, Ohio, test-drove a vehicle at each dealership, kept the keys to the vehicle, handed the salesperson a different set of keys, and later stole the vehicles from the dealerships by using the stolen keys.

In October 1991, appellant was tried before a jury. The jury found appellant guilty of all charges in the indictment. On October 29, 1991, the trial court sentenced appellant on the two counts of motor vehicle grand theft (counts one and three) and the two counts of possession of criminal tools (counts two and four). At the sentencing hearing, appellant requested that he be released on bond pending appeal. The trial court denied appellant's motion. The final judgment entry imposing sentence was filed on November 4, 1991.

On December 2, 1991, appellant appealed to the court of appeals, seeking reversal of his convictions and sentences. However, on June 14, 1993, the court of appeals dismissed appellant's appeal, stating, in part:

"A review of the record indicates that Golston was sentenced by the trial court to a term of one and one-half years each on counts one and three, and a term of one year each on counts two and four, counts two and four to run concurrent with count one. * * * The one and one-half year sentences on counts one and three are deemed to be served concurrently since the trial court did not specify otherwise. * * *

"In the present case, there is no stay of execution in the record. Therefore, Golston's effective total sentence of eighteen months was served from November 4, 1991, to May 4, 1993. Additionally, Golston has not presented in the case sub judice 'any evidence from which an inference can be drawn that he will suffer some collateral legal disability or loss of civil rights.' State v. Williams (Cuyahoga 1992), 80 Ohio App.3d 542, 543 * * *. This appeal is therefore dismissed as moot. Id."

The cause is now before this court upon the allowance of a motion for leave to appeal.

Stephanie Tubbs Jones, Cuyahoga County Pros. Atty., and Craig T. Weintraub, Asst. Pros. Atty., Cleveland, for appellee.

American Civ. Liberties Union of Ohio Foundation, Inc., and William M. Saks, Cleveland, for appellant.

DOUGLAS, Justice.

This court has held that where a criminal defendant, convicted of a misdemeanor, voluntarily satisfies the judgment imposed upon him or her for that offense, an appeal from the conviction is moot unless the defendant has offered evidence from which an inference can be drawn that he or she will suffer some collateral legal disability or loss of civil rights stemming from that conviction. See State v. Wilson (1975), 41 Ohio St.2d 236, 70 O.O.2d 431, 325 N.E.2d 236, and State v. Berndt (1987), 29 Ohio St.3d 3, 29 OBR 173, 504 N.E.2d 712.

In Wilson, supra, a defendant pled "no contest" to a charge of carrying a concealed weapon, a three-inch straight razor. Carrying such a concealed weapon is a misdemeanor of the first degree. See R.C. 2923.12. The defendant was found guilty of the charge, and assessed a fine and costs, which the defendant promptly paid. Thereafter, the defendant, through counsel, appealed to the court of appeals. The court of appeals dismissed the appeal as moot. Upon further appeal, this court affirmed the judgment of the court of appeals, finding that the defendant had failed to establish that he had any substantial stake in his conviction that may have survived the payment of the fine and costs. Id., 41 Ohio St.2d at 237, 70 O.O.2d at 432, 325 N.E.2d at 237. We held that "[w]here a defendant, convicted of a criminal offense, has voluntarily paid the fine or completed the sentence for that offense, an appeal is moot when no evidence is offered from which an inference can be drawn that the defendant will suffer some collateral disability or loss of civil rights from such judgment or conviction." Id. at syllabus. We concluded that the burden of presenting evidence that the defendant has such a "substantial stake in the judgment of conviction" is upon the defendant. Id. at 237, 70 O.O.2d at 432, 325 N.E.2d at 237.

In Berndt, supra, a criminal defendant was convicted for operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol, a misdemeanor of the first degree. See R.C. 4511.19 and 4511.99. The defendant pled guilty to the charge. Upon acceptance of the plea, the court sentenced the defendant to six months' incarceration and imposed a fine of $1,000, of which all but three days and $150 were suspended. The defendant voluntarily served his sentence and paid the fine. Thereafter, the defendant appealed to the court of appeals, which addressed the merits of the appeal. In Berndt, this court, applying Wilson, supra, held that the court of appeals should have dismissed the appeal as moot, since the defendant had not established that he would suffer some collateral disability or loss of civil rights resulting from his conviction. Id., 29 Ohio St.3d at 4-5, 29 OBR at 174, 504 N.E.2d at 713-714.

In the case at bar, appellant appealed to the court of appeals, seeking reversal of his felony convictions. The court of appeals dismissed the appeal as moot, since appellant had already served his sentence and had offered no evidence demonstrating that he would suffer some collateral legal disability or loss of civil rights stemming from the challenged convictions. In so holding, the court of appeals relied upon Williams, supra, 80 Ohio App.3d 542, 609 N.E.2d 1307, an Ohio appellate decision which applied the law of Wilson and Berndt to an appeal from a felony conviction. We find that the court of appeals erred in this regard. We hold...

To continue reading

Request your trial
238 cases
  • In re Contemnor Caron
    • United States
    • Ohio Court of Common Pleas
    • April 27, 2000
    ...rights from such judgment or conviction, if his appeal is not to be rendered moot. The Ohio Supreme Court in State v. Golston (1994), 71 Ohio St.3d 224, 227, 643 N.E.2d 109, 111-112 stated: "We hold that the test for mootness outlined in Wilson [41 Ohio St.2d 236, 70 O.O.2d 431, 325 N.E.2d ......
  • State v. Aalim
    • United States
    • Ohio Supreme Court
    • May 25, 2017
    ...has noted that the "collateral legal consequences associated with a felony conviction are severe and obvious." State v. Golston, 71 Ohio St.3d 224, 227, 643 N.E.2d 109 (1994). Perhaps most severe is "the infamy and disgrace resulting from a felony conviction [that] seriously affects a perso......
  • State v. Malone
    • United States
    • Louisiana Supreme Court
    • December 1, 2009
    ...the defendant will suffer some collateral disability or loss of civil rights from such judgment or conviction); State v. Golston, 71 Ohio St.3d 224, 643 N.E.2d 109 (1994) (distinguishing between misdemeanor and felony convictions and recognizing that a person convicted of a felony has a sub......
  • Cyran v. Cyran
    • United States
    • Ohio Supreme Court
    • January 4, 2018
    ...has recognized the collateral-consequences exception to the mootness doctrine in criminal and traffic cases. State v. Golston , 71 Ohio St.3d 224, 227, 643 N.E.2d 109 (1994) (due to the numerous statutory restrictions imposed on convicted felons, an appeal of a felony conviction is not moot......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT