COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT
 
                       COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA
 
                       NOS. 82612 & 82613
 
 
 
CITY OF CLEVELAND            :         JOURNAL ENTRY
                             :              AND
          Plaintiff-appellee :            OPINION
                             :
       -vs-                  :
                             :
YOLANDA MITCHELL             :
GEORGE CORNELL               :
                             :
       Defendants-appellants :
 
 
DATE OF ANNOUNCEMENT
    OF DECISION:                  JANUARY 15, 2004
 
CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING:          Criminal appeal from the
                                  Court of Common Pleas
                                  Case No. 2002-CRB-17898
 
 
JUDGMENT:                         Dismissed
 
DATE OF JOURNALIZATION:
 
 
APPEARANCES:
 
For Plaintiff-Appellee:           WILLIAM D. MASON, ESQ.
                                  CUYAHOGA COUNTY PROSECUTOR
                                  BY: DONALD GALLICK, ESQ.
                                  1200 Ontario Street
                                  Justice Center
                                  Cleveland, Ohio 44113
 
For Defendants-Appellants:        MYRON P. WATSON, ESQ.
                                  JAMES R. WILLIS, ESQ.
                                  113 St. Clair Building
                                  113 St. Clair Ave., #440
                                  Cleveland, Ohio 44114-1214
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                -2-
 
ANN DYKE, J.:
 
     In this consolidated appeal, defendants-appellants George
 
Cornell ("Cornell") and Yolanda Mitchell ("Mitchell") challenge the
 
trial court's guilty verdicts against them. We note numerous
 
deficiencies in the record, including missing charges, motions, and
 
journal and sentencing entries regarding the disposition of two
 
charges against Cornell. We therefore dismiss this matter for lack
 
of a final appealable order.
 
     Plaintiff-appellee the City of Cleveland ("Cleveland") filed
 
charges against Mitchell on May 10, 2002 of Operating a Gambling
 
House in violation of Cleveland Codified Ordinance ("CCO") section
 
611.03, a first-degree misdemeanor and Bottle Clubs, in violation
 
of C.O. section 617.09, a third-degree misdemeanor.1   On August 8,
 
2002, two new charges were filed against both the defendants:
 
Public Gaming in violation of CCO section 611.04 and Permit
 
Required  in   violation   of   CCO   617.05,  both   first-degree
 
misdemeanors.
 
     Following various motions, the matter proceeded to a jury
 
trial on November 7, 2002. The jury found Mitchell guilty of CCO
 
sections 617.09, 617.05, and 611.04 and she was thereafter
 
 
 
 
     1
     The transcript indicates and both parties submit in their
briefs that Cornell was indicted on these charges, however there is
nothing in the record that would so indicate.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               -3-
 
sentenced.2 The jury found Cornell guilty of CCO sections 617.05
 
and 611.04 and was sentenced to a fine, 180 days of incarceration,
 
which were suspended, and three years of probation. The jury also
 
found Cornell guilty of CCO 617.09.
 
     Crim.R. 32 (C) provides that "[a] judgment of conviction shall
 
set forth the plea, the verdict or findings, and the sentence. If
 
the defendant is found not guilty or for any other reason is
 
entitled to be discharged, judgment shall be entered accordingly.
 
The judgment shall be signed by the judge and entered by the
 
clerk." Accord State v. Ginocchio (1987), 38 Ohio App.3d 105.
 
     While the transcript indicates that Cornell was charged with
 
and found guilty of CCO 617.09, the record is devoid of any
 
documentation relating to the charge, including: the summons,
 
charges, any related motions, and journal entries or sentencing
 
entries.
 
     Furthermore, we note that appellants fail to comply with
 
App.R. 3(D), which states in relevant part:
 
     "The notice of appeal shall specify the party or parties
 
taking the appeal; shall designate the judgment, order or part
 
thereof appealed from *** ."
 
 
 
 
     2
     CCO 611.03 as charged in the indictment against Mitchell was
nolled.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               -4-
 
    Because no complete record has been provided, this court will
 
permit appellants amend their notices of appeal, pursuant to App.R.
 
3 (F), at the time they complete the record on appeal.
 
    Appeal dismissed.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               -5-
 
    It   is,  therefore,   considered  that   said  appellee  and
 
appellants share equally their costs herein.
 
    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.
 
 
 
 
MICHAEL J. CORRIGAN, A.J.,   AND
 
KENNETH A. ROCCO, J.,    CONCURS.
 
 
 
 
                                             ANN DYKE
                                              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).
 
.