COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA No. 80912 STATE OF OHIO :: JOURNAL ENTRY Plaintiff-Appellee :: AND vs. :: OPINION THOMAS FRANKS :: Defendant-Appellant ::: DATE OF ANNOUNCEMENT OF DECISION : NOVEMBER 14, 2002 : CHARACTER OF PROCEEDINGS : Criminal appeal from : Common Pleas Court : Case No. CR-386512 : JUDGMENT : AFFIRMED. DATE OF JOURNALIZATION : APPEARANCES: For plaintiff-appellee: WILLIAM D. MASON, ESQ. Cuyahoga County Prosecutor The Justice Center, 9th Floor 1200 Ontario Street Cleveland, Ohio 44113 For defendant-appellant: EDWARD A. HEFFERNAN, ESQ. 216A The Atrium Office Building 668 Euclid Avenue Cleveland, Ohio 44114-3004 -2- FRANK D. CELEBREZZE, JR., J.: The appellant, Thomas Franks, appeals the sentence imposed by the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas, Criminal Division, in which the lower court sentenced him to three years incarceration at Lorain County Correctional Institute. For the following reasons, the appeal is not well taken. On January 31, 2000, the Cuyahoga County Grand Jury issued a three-count indictment against Franks. After plea negotiations, he pled guilty to one count of attempting to possess drugs, a felony of the second degree. As a result of this plea, the remaining two counts were dismissed. Franks was thereafter sentenced to three years incarceration at the Lorain Correctional Institute. Franks appealed the sentence, and this court reversed the three-year sentence finding that the lower court had failed to comply with R.C. 2929.14(B). Specifically, this court determined that the lower court failed to make the requisite findings on the record as required by R.C. 2929.14(B). See, State v. Franks (Nov. 15, 2001), Cuyahoga App. No. 79465. On remand for resentencing, the lower court again imposed a three-year sentence. It is from this sentence that Franks now appeals. He presents one assignment of error for this court s review: THE LOWER COURT S IMPOSITION OF A PRISON SENTENCE ABOVE THE STATUTORY MINIMUM AFTER REMAND FOR RESENTENCING WAS AN ABUSE OF DISCRETION. -3- R.C. 2929.14(B) requires a trial court to impose a minimum sentence for first-time imprisonment unless it specifies on the record that the shortest prison term would demean the seriousness of the conduct or would not adequately protect the public from future crime. State v. Edmonson (1999), 86 Ohio St.3d 324, 325. In the case at hand, the appellant had not served a previous prison term; therefore, R.C. 2929.14(B) requires the court to impose the minimum two-year term unless it states on the record at least one of the requisite findings. At resentencing, the lower court stated that the shortest prison term would demean the seriousness of the offense and that a sentence in excess of the two-year minimum is appropriate in accordance with R.C. 2929.14(B). (Tr. 10). The lower court substantiated this sentence by pointing to the fact that the appellant was arrested with over 25 grams of crack cocaine on his person and that his arrest was a result of a continuing surveillance of the appellant and his chronic drug dealings. Moreover, the lower court noted that on two separate occasions, the authorities attempted to apprehend the appellant and he fled, resulting in two high-speed chases involving the police, which endangered both the authorities, the general public and the appellant s safety. Accordingly, it is clear that the lower court satisfied the sentencing mandates of R.C. 2929.14(B) in resentencing the -4- appellant. Therefore, the sentence imposed by the lower court is hereby affirmed. -5- It is ordered that appellee recover from appellant 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 common pleas court 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. TIMOTHY E. McMONAGLE, A.J., AND TERRENCE O DONNELL, J., CONCUR. FRANK D. CELEBREZZE, JR. 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. 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). .