BROWN LAW OFFICE CRIMINAL DEFENSE BLOG

The Ohio Supreme Court recently held that a trial court cannot sentence a criminal defendant for two or more offenses that the court determines are “allied offenses of similar import.”  In State v. Williams, 2016-Ohio-7658, the Court held that when

a sentencing court concludes that an offender has been found guilty of two or more offenses that are allied offenses of similar import, in conformity with State v. Whitfield, 124 Ohio St.3d 319, 2010-Ohio-2, 922 N.E.2d 182, it should permit the state to select the allied offense to proceed on for purposes of imposing sentence and it should impose sentence for only that offense. Accordingly, imposing separate sentences for allied offenses of similar import is contrary to law and such sentences are void.

A link to the decision can be found here.  http://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/0/2016/2016-Ohio-7658.pdf

In other words, when an individual engages in a single course of conduct that potentially gives rise to two or more criminal offenses, those criminal offenses should merge and the defendant can only be sentenced on one of them.  This doctrine is known as “allied offenses of similar import,” which is an argument that experienced criminal attorneys raise to ensure that their clients are not convicted of multiple offenses for the same course of conduct.  The criminal attorneys at the Brown Law Office often use this defense to ensure that clients’ rights are vindicated.  Contact the criminal attorneys at the Brown Law Office today for a free consultation at 330-601-0101.