COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA NO. 59651 STATE OF OHIO : : Plaintiff-appellee : : JOURNAL ENTRY -vs- : AND : OPINION TIMOTHY ROGERS : : Defendant-appellant : : DATE OF ANNOUNCEMENT : OF DECISION : DECEMBER 19, 1991 CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING : Criminal appeal from Court of Common Pleas : Case No. CR-239203 JUDGMENT : AFFIRMED. DATE OF JOURNALIZATION : APPEARANCES: For plaintiff-appellee: For defendant-appellant: STEPHANIE TUBBS-JONES MARY ANN O. RINI, ESQ. CUYAHOGA COUNTY PROSECUTOR 6151 Wilson Mills Road PAUL J. DALEY, ASST. Highland Hts., Ohio 44143 Justice Center - 8th Floor 1200 Ontario Street Cleveland, Ohio 44113 - 2 - J.F. CORRIGAN, P.J.: Appellant, Timothy Rogers, appeals from his conviction for trafficking in marijuana. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm. I. Appellant was indicted by a Cuyahoga County Grand Jury for one count of possession of cocaine in violation of R.C. 2925.11, one count of trafficking in marijuana in violation of R.C. 2925.03, and one count of possessing criminal tools in violation of R.C. 2923.24. Each count contained a violence specification. Appellant pled guilty to count two of the indictment, trafficking in marijuana. Counts one and three of the indictment were nolled upon motion by the state. Appellant was then sentenced to a one to five year term of incarceration by the trial court. This appeal timely follows. II. For his sole assignment of error, appellant argues that he was denied his right to effective assistance of counsel on the grounds that his appointed counsel failed to properly challenge the imposition of a mandatory fine. The transcript of the sentencing hearing and various court documents indicate the court's intent to levy a $2,000 fine against appellant pursuant to the provisions of R.C. 2925.03(H). This intent was never expressed in the court's official journal - 3 - entry sentencing appellant. In sentencing appellant, the court merely journalized the following statement: "It is therefore ordered and adjudged that said defendant, Timothy Rogers, is sentenced to the Correctional Reception Center, Orient, Ohio for a term of one (1) to five (5) years and costs." A court speaks through its journals and an entry is effective only when it has been journalized. Crim. R. 32(B). To journalize a decision means that certain formal requirements have been met, i.e., the decision is reduced to writing, it is signed by a judge, and it is filed with the clerk so that it may become a part of the permanent record of the court. State v. Ellington (1987), 36 Ohio App. 3d 76, 78. In this case, the entry journalized by the trial court did not include a $2,000 fine. The court's intent to impose this fine was not properly journalized and is therefore not part of appellant's sentence. Appellant's assignment of error is not supported by the record. Appellant's assignment of error is without merit. Judgment affirmed. - 4 - It is ordered that appellee recover of appellant its costs herein taxed. The Court finds there were reasonable grounds for this appeal. It is ordered that a special mandate issue out of this Court directing the Court of Common Pleas to carry this judgment into execution. The defendant's conviction having been affirmed, any bail pending appeal is terminated. Case remanded to the trial court for execution of sentence. A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to Rule 27 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure. ANN McMANAMON, J., and JAMES D. SWEENEY, J., CONCUR. JOHN F. CORRIGAN PRESIDING JUDGE N.B. This entry is made pursuant to the third sentence of Rule 22(D), Ohio Rules of Appellate Procedure. This is an announce- ment of decision (see Rule 26). Ten (10) days from the date hereof, this document will be stamped to indicate journaliza- tion, at which time it will become the judgment and order of the court and time period for review will begin to run. .