State v. Batiste

Criminal Appeal from the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Case No. CR-19-636866-A

Michael C. O'Malley, Cuyahoga County Prosecuting Attorney, and Alaina Hagans, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.

Allison S. Breneman, for appellant

JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION

MARY J. BOYLE, ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE

{¶ 1} Defendant-appellant, Taiwan Batiste, appeals his sentence. He raises one assignment of error for our review:

The trial court abused its discretion by imposing a maximum prison sentence contrary to R.C. 2929.14 and the purposes and principles of felony sentencing guidelines

2

{¶ 2} Finding no merit to the assignment of error, we affirm the trial court's judgment.

I. Procedural History and Factual Background

{¶ 3} This is the second time that Batiste has appealed his sentence. As we explained in State v. Batiste, 2020-Ohio-3673, 154 N.E.3d 1220, ¶ 3 (8th Dist.), the underlying charges stem from January 2018. Batiste first broke into and stole property from a vehicle parked near the Beachland Ballroom and Tavern in Cleveland. Id. He then approached two females who were walking to their vehicle after attending an event at Beachland. Id. He approached them from behind while wearing a ski mask and dark clothing. Id. He told them, "'[d]on't look back or I'll shoot.'" Id. He took from them a purse, a cell phone, and a backpack. Id. He threatened the victims by telling them, "I have a gun. I'm going to shoot you. Don't turn around." Id. The victims told law enforcement that he fled in a dark-colored vehicle. Id. Forty minutes later, law enforcement located Batiste in a vehicle matching the description, and a purse belonging to one of the victims was on the front seat. Id. at ¶ 4. They searched Batiste and found one of the victim's driver's license and debit card. Id.

{¶ 4} Batiste pleaded guilty to an amended indictment of two counts of robbery in violation of R.C. 2911.02(A)(1), second-degree felonies, one with a one-year firearm specification; two counts of abduction in violation of R.C. 2905.02(A)(2), third-degree felonies; and two counts of theft in violation of R.C. 2913.02(A)(1), fifth-degree felonies. The trial court sentenced Batiste to a

3

cumulative prison term of 24 years. This court found that the record did not support the trial court's imposition of consecutive sentences, vacated the sentences, and remanded for resentencing. Id. at ¶ 27.

{¶ 5} On remand, the trial court held a resentencing hearing. One of the victims spoke to share how Batiste's crime has affected her life. She explained that she did not speak at Batiste's original sentencing because she "was really scared," and that "it took a lot" for her to decide to speak at the resentencing hearing. The victim said that she and the other victim, her friend, had attended an event at Beachland and were walking from the venue to their car. She explained that Batiste and "a man in an SUV" were "waiting on a side street" and "ambushed" her and her friend as they turned around a corner. She said that Batiste "took everything" that they had and left "thinking that they had stranded" the victims. She explained that "luckily," her friend had her car key on a lanyard around her neck that Batiste did not see, so they were able to drive to a gas station to call the police. She stated that the police found their belongings by tracking their phones. She explained that Batiste and the other male used her credit card "at a wing place" and then withdrew $200 in cash from Walgreens. She said she was not able to pay rent until she "was able to get that money back."

{¶ 6} The victim explained that she and her friend think about the crime "all the time" and that it has affected them "a lot." She said that she "can't leave the house without thinking about it." She stated that she did not "want anybody else to

4

have to carry this around and be scared to leave their house," to "go and do things," and to walk to their car.

{¶ 7} The trial court sentenced Batiste to a total sentence of nine years in prison and a total fine of $1, 500: for the first count of robbery, $250 and eight years, plus one year for the firearm specification; for the second count of robbery, $250 and eight years; for each count of abduction, $250 and three years; and for each count of theft, $250 and one year. The trial court ordered the sentences to run concurrently. The trial court stated that Batiste will be subject to three years of mandatory postrelease control and explained the consequences if he were to violate the terms of postrelease control.

{¶ 8} Batiste timely appealed.

II. Law and Analysis

{¶ 9} In his sole assignment of error, Batiste argues that the trial court abused its discretion when it imposed the maximum prison sentence. He maintains that there is "no basis" for the maximum sentence because he had no previous felony convictions as an adult, he took responsibility for his conduct, he did not injure anyone, and "a gun was not found and allegedly not used." He contends that his sentence is therefore excessive and disproportionate to his crime.

{¶ 10} "An appellate court must conduct a meaningful review of the trial court's sentencing decision." State v. McHugh, 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 108372, 2020-Ohio-1024, ¶ 11. For felony sentences, an "appellate court's standard for review is not whether the sentencing court abused its discretion."

5

R.C. 2953.08(G)(2). Instead, R.C. 2953.08(G)(2) provides that appellate courts "may increase, reduce, or otherwise modify a sentence * * * or may vacate the sentence and remand the matter to the sentencing court for resentencing" if the reviewing court "clearly and convincingly" finds that (a) "the record does not support the sentencing court's findings" under R.C. 2929.13(B) or (D), 2929.14(B)(2)(e) or (C)(4), or R.C. 2929.20(I) - statutory...