COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT
                       COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA
                            NO. 79808
IN RE: KHARY INGRAM,                      JOURNAL ENTRY
                                               AND
[Appeal by Khary Ingram]
                                             OPINION
DATE OF ANNOUNCEMENT
 OF DECISION:                    FEBRUARY 28, 2002
CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING:         Civil appeal from the Juvenile
                                 Court Division of Common Pleas
                                 Court, Case No. 01101655
JUDGMENT:                        Vacated and Remanded for
                                 Resentencing.
DATE OF JOURNALIZATION:
APPEARANCES:
For plaintiff-appellee:          WILLIAM D. MASON, ESQ.
                                 Cuyahoga County Prosecutor
                                 PATRICK LEARY, ESQ.
                                 Assistant County Prosecutor
                                 The Justice Center
                                 1200 Ontario Street
                                 Cleveland, Ohio  44113
For defendant-appellant:         DAVID H. BODIKER, ESQ.
                                 Ohio Public Defender
                                 LISA F. THOMPSON, ESQ.
                                 Assistant State Public Defender
                                 8 East Long Street, 11th Floor
                                 Columbus, Ohio  43215
                               -2-
PATTON, J.:
     Juvenile-appellant Khary Ingram appeals his sentence following
his plea bargain in juvenile court.
     The juvenile, a seventeen-year-old boy with an extensive prior
juvenile history, was accused of breaking into a neighbor's  home
and stealing items from the home.  A complaint was filed alleging
that he  was a  delinquent child  for committing  the offense  of
burglary in violation of R.C. 2911.12(A)(2), which offense would be
a second degree felony if  committed by an adult.  Initially  the
juvenile denied the charge.  However, the prosecutor filed a motion
to relinquish jurisdiction to the common pleas court, at which time
the juvenile agreed to a negotiated plea agreement.  He agreed to
admit to the charges and to a minimum two-year confinement to the
Department of Youth Services.  He timely appealed.
     The juvenile states two assignments of error.  For his first
assignment of error, the juvenile states,
     I. THE TRIAL COURT EXCEEDED ITS STATUTORY AUTHORITY WHEN
     IT COMMITTED KHARY INGRAM TO A MINIMUM OF TWO (2) YEARS
     AND A MAXIMUM OF HIS TWENTY-FIRST BIRTHDAY IN DEPARTMENT
     OF YOUTH SERVICES FOR BURGLARY, A FELONY OF THE  SECOND
     DEGREE IF COMMITTED BY AN ADULT.
     The juvenile  argues that  the juvenile  court exceeded  its
authority by committing him  to a term which exceeds the  minimum
term permitted by statute.   R.C. 2151.355(A) lists the terms  to
which a juvenile can be committed.  R.C. 2151.355(A)(5) states that
a juvenile may be committed for a minimum of one year and a maximum
of his twenty-first birthday for an offense that would be a second
degree felony if committed by an adult.  He states, therefore, that
                               -3-
the  court  was  without   authority  to  increase  his   minimum
confinement, despite the plea agreement.
     The juvenile is correct.  As this court recently noted in In
Re: Dwayne  Vaughters (Nov. 1,  2001), Cuyahoga  App. No.  79056,
unreported, 2001 Ohio App. LEXIS 4890, despite any plea agreement
made between the juvenile and  the prosecutor, the  court has  no
power to substitute a different sentence for that provided by law.
*** Any attempt by a court to disregard statutory requirements when
imposing a sentence  renders the attempted sentence a nullity  or
void. Id.at 3, citing State v. Beasely (1984), 14 Ohio St.3d 74,
75.
     Therefore, as in Vaughters, we remand this case to the trial
court for  resentencing  with  the appropriate  minimum  term  of
confinement as defined in R.C. 2151.355(A)(5).
     The first assignment of error is sustained.
     For his second assignment of error, the juvenile states,
          II.    KHARY  INGRAM  WAS  DENIED  THE   EFFECTIVE
     ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL WHEN COUNSEL FAILED TO OBJECT  TO
     THIS SENTENCE OR OTHERWISE BRING THE SENTENCING ERROR TO
     THE COURT'S ATTENTION.
     In light of the disposition of the first assignment of error,
the second assignment of error is moot.
     The  disposition  is   vacated  and  remanded  for   further
proceedings consistent with this opinion.
                               -4-
     It is, therefore, ordered that appellant recover of appellee
his costs herein taxed.
     It is ordered that a special mandate be sent to said court to
carry this judgment into execution.
     A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the  mandate
pursuant to Rule 27 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure.
TIMOTHY E. McMONAGLE, ADM.J., and
PATRICIA ANN BLACKMON, J., CONCUR.
                                        JOHN T. PATTON*
                                             JUDGE
     *Judge John T. Patton, Retired, of the Eighth District Court
of Appeals, sitting by assignment.
     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. 22.  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
journalization of  this court's announcement  of decision by  the
clerk  per App.R.  22(E).   See, also,  S.Ct.Prac.R. II,  Section
2(A)(1).
 
.