COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT
                         COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA
                                NO. 70057
                                   :
STATE OF OHIO                      :
                                   :       JOURNAL ENTRY
          Plaintiff-Appellee       :
                                   :            and
     -vs-                          :
                                   :          OPINION
                                   :
NELLIE CONNOR                      :
                                   :
          Defendant-Appellant      :
                                   :
DATE OF ANNOUNCEMENT                    OCTOBER 31, 1996       
OF DECISION:
CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING:           Criminal appeal from
                                   Common Pleas Court
                                   Case No. CR-233402
JUDGMENT:                          Dismissed.
DATE OF JOURNALIZATION:            __________________________
APPEARANCES:
For Plaintiff-Appellee:            For Defendant-Appellant:
BRIAN MCGRAW, ESQ.                 DONALD GREEN, ESQ.
RANDI OSTRY LEHOTY, ESQ.           Assistant Public Defender
Assistant County Prosecutors       100 Lakeside Place
8th Floor Justice Center           1200 West Third Street
1200 Ontario Street                Cleveland, Ohio  44113
Cleveland, Ohio  44113
                                -2-
PATRICIA ANN BLACKMON, P.J.: 
     Defendant-appellant,  Nellie Connor, appeals a judgment of the
trial court finding her guilty of  theft and food stamp trafficking
and assigns the following for our review:
          THE TRIAL  COURT ERRED  IN FINDING  THAT APPEL-
          LANT'S CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT  TO A SPEEDY  TRIAL
          HAD NOT BEEN VIOLATED.  
     Having reviewed the  record of the  proceedings and the  legal
arguments presented by the parties, we dismiss this appeal for lack
of a final appealable order.  The apposite facts follow.
     Nellie Connor entered a  no contest plea and was  found guilty
of two separate offenses,  theft and food stamp trafficking.   Each
separate offense is a third degree  felony, which carries a minimum
sentence of one year and a  maximum sentence of two years incarcer-
ation.   When Connor was sentenced, the  judge sentenced her to six
months in jail on one of those charges.  It  is unclear as to which
one, and the  record is silent as  to the sentencing on  the second
charge.   For the  failure to sentence  on the second  charge, this
court concludes  the order appealed  from is interlocutory  and not
final.
     Crim.R. 32(B) imposes a mandatory duty upon the trial court to
set forth the  plea, the verdict or findings, and  the sentence for
each and every criminal charge prosecuted.  E.g. Cleveland v. Wirtz
(Aug.  1,  1991),  Cuyahoga  App.No. 58967,  unreported.    "In the
absence of a signed journal entry  reflecting the court's ruling as
to each charge,  the order  of the trial  court is  interlocutory."
Cleveland v. Rubenstein  (Oct. 29, 1981), Cuyahoga App.  No. 43415,
                                -3-
unreported.   See, also, State v.  Brown (1989), 59  Ohio App.3d 1.
Thus, a trial  court's ruling is not a final  appealable order when
there  is no  sentence imposed for  a charge  for which there  is a
finding of guilty.   Cleveland  v. Makris (May  5, 1994),  Cuyahoga
App.Nos. 62632,  62633,  62634, unreported.   See,  also, State  v.
Dickey (1991), 74 Ohio App.3d 587.
     Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed.     
                                -4-
     This cause is dismissed.
     It is  ordered that appellee  recover of  appellant its  costs
herein taxed.
     A  certified copy of  this entry shall  constitute the mandate
pursuant  to  Rule  27   of  the  Rules  of  Appellate   Procedure.
Exceptions.
HARPER, J., and    
PORTER, J., CONCUR.
                                     PATRICIA ANN BLACKMON
                                             JUDGE
     "N.B.  This entry is an  announcement of the court's decision.
See App.R. 22(B),  22(D) and 26(A);  Loc.App.R. 27.  This  decision
will be journalized  and will become the judgment  and order of the
court pursuant to App.R. 22(E) unless a  motion for reconsideration
with supporting brief, per  App.R. 26(A), is filed within  ten (10)
days of the announcement of the  court's decision.  The time period
for review by the Supreme Court of Ohio shall begin to run upon the
.