State v. Taylor
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[Cite as State v. Taylor, 2006-Ohio-5382.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO MADISON COUNTY STATE OF OHIO, Plaintiff-Appellee, : : CASE NO. CA2006-02-007 : OPINION 10/16/2006 - vs : BRYAN K. TAYLOR, Defendant-Appellant. : : CRIMINAL APPEAL FROM MADISON COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Case No. 2005CR-11-111 Stephen J. Pronai, Madison County Prosecuting Attorney, Eamon P. Costello, 23 West High Street, London, OH 43140, for plaintiff-appellee Shannon M. Treynor, 63 North Main Street, P.O. Box 735, London, OH 43140, for defendantappellant POWELL, P.J. {¶1} Defendant-appellant, Bryan K. Taylor, pled guilty to one third-degree felony charge of theft of anhydrous ammonia in violation of R.C. 2913.02(A)(1), and one count of breaking and entering, a fifth-degree felony, in violation of R.C. 2911.13(B). The trial court, after making findings pursuant to R.C. 2929.14(B) and (C), imposed maximum concurrent prison terms on each count. Madison CA2006-02-007 {¶2} Appellant presents one assignment of error which claims that the trial court erred by sentencing appellant to maximum prison terms. {¶3} In State v. Foster, 109 Ohio St.3d, 2006-Ohio-856, the Ohio Supreme Court held that portions of Ohio's statutory sentencing scheme were unconstitutional. Among those statues found unconstitutional was R.C. 2929.14(C), concerning the imposition of a maximum prison term. Id. at ¶83, 97-99. The Foster court severed this section from the sentencing code and instructed that all cases pending on direct review in which the unconstitutional sentencing provisions were utilized must be remanded for resentencing. Id. at ¶104. Because the trial court utilized R.C. 2929.14(C) to impose maximum prison terms, we must remand this case for resentencing consistent with Foster. {¶4} Appellant's sole assignment of error is sustained. {¶5} The judgment of the trial court is reversed as to sentencing only and the case is remanded for resentencing. YOUNG and BRESSLER, JJ., concur. -2- [Cite as State v. Taylor, 2006-Ohio-5382.]
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
