It's Not Nice to Defraud Your Elderly Mother
b'
\\nGuilty Pleas Support to Crimes Against Family & Friends Deserves Consecutive Sentences\\n\\n\\n
\\nJon Settlemire ("Settlemire"), appealed the judgment of sentence imposing consecutive sentences only to find an appeals court with no mercy. When the Marion County Grand Jury returned a 45-count indictment charging Settlemire with a variety of felony-level crimes Settlemire entered a plea of not guilty to the indictment. After pre-trial proceedings Settlemire entered a negotiated plea of guilty to five crimes.
\\nIn State Of Ohio v. Jon M. Settlemire, 2023-Ohio-1852, No. 9-22-33, Court of Appeals of Ohio (June 5, 2023) Settlemire pled guilty to a charge of Theft in violation, a fourth-degree felony; a charge of Forgery, a fifth-degree felony; a charge of Forgery in violation of, a fifth-degree felony; a charge of Theft, a fourth-degree felony; and amended to a charge of Forgery a third-degree felony. In exchange for the guilty plea the prosecution dismissed the remaining counts of the indictment.
\\nOn April 28, 2022, a sentencing hearing was held. At that time, the trial court imposed a sentence and that all counts be served consecutively, for an aggregate sentence of 86 months in prison.
\\nIn the sole assignment of error, Settlemire argueD that the trial court erred in ordering that the sentences in this case be served consecutively. Specifically, Settlemire assertd that the aggregate sentence here is disproportionate and overly severe when compared to the criminal conduct of which he was convicted.
\\nIf multiple prison terms are imposed on an offender for convictions of multiple offenses, the court may require the offender to serve the prison terms consecutively if the court finds that the consecutive service is necessary to protect the public from future crime or to punish the offender and that consecutive sentences are not disproportionate to the seriousness of the offender\'s conduct and to the danger the offender poses to the public.
\\nIn State v. Gwynne,___ Ohio St.3d ___, 2022-Ohio-4607, the Supreme Court of Ohio noted that defendants may appeal consecutive sentences, and that a statute states that an appellate court may increase, reduce, or otherwise modify a sentence or that it may vacate the sentence and remand the case for resentencing when it clearly and convincingly finds that the record does not support the sentencing courts decision.
\\nThe appellate court\\u2019s review of Settlemire\'s sentences reflects that the trial court made the requisite consecutive-sentence findings pursuant to the statute at the sentencing hearing and incorporated those findings into the judgment entry of sentencing.
\\nThe trial court noted when imposing sentence, and as confirmed by the record, Settlemire\'s multiple crimes of Theft and Forgery resulted in a loss of nearly $50,000.00 to the various victims, and the multiple victims in this case suffered serious economic harm. Settlemire\'s relationship with the victims facilitated the offenses, with one of those victims being Settlemire\'s elderly mother. Finally, as the trial court noted, Settlemire was initially charged with 45 felony counts in this case, and a sentencing court may consider charges that have been dismissed or reduced pursuant to a plea agreement.
\\nThe number of consecutive sentences and the aggregate sentence here were not disproportionate or overly severe when compared to the criminal conduct of which Settlemire was found guilty.
\\nHaving found no error prejudicial to the defendant-appellant in the particulars assigned and argued, the judgment of the Marion County Court of Common Pleas s affirmed.
\\nBad people who are convicted of multiple crimes deserve punishment. No fraud perpetrator is more deserving of punishment than a man who defrauds his elderly mother and relatives. The Ohio court properly sentenced Settlemire to spend the next 86 months in an Ohio State prison.
\\n\\xa0
\\n\\n\\n
\\n\\n--- \\n\\nSupport this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/barry-zalma/support'