A Fifth District appellate panel reversed the trial court’s sentencing of a Delaware County man after determining the lower court failed to make all of the requisite findings to opt for a community-control sentence over jail time for the offender.

The appellate panel reasoned that although the law is not clear on how specific such findings must be to overcome the presumption of a prison sentence, the Supreme Court of Ohio has provided recommendations for other sentencing considerations that may be applied.

“We find the guidance set forth regarding consecutive sentencing to be instructive in the instant case, and look to the trial court’s statements at the sentencing hearing to determine if we can discern the trial court engaged in the correct analysis required by R.C. 2929.13(D)(2),” Fifth District Judge William Hoffman wrote for the panel.

Majid Nosrati, 45, of Concord Township, agreed to plead guilty to a single count of felonious assault if two counts of an attempted murder charge and another count of the felonious assault charge were dismissed relative to the events occurring Feb. 25, 2024.

Nosrati invited a long-time friend to his home for dinner and drinks, case background provided. According to testimony, Nosrati said his friend arrived at his home drunk, which angered him. He became intoxicated himself and broke a glass bottle, using the neck of the broken bottle to stab his friend’s neck just below his ear.

Nosrati then grabbed a knife and chased the victim with it before stabbing him in the back, summary detailed. The victim was able to flee the home and seek treatment for lacerations at an area hospital.

A Delaware County grand jury subsequently indicted Nosrati, who agreed to the negotiated plea. A presentence investigation was completed and the case proceeded to a sentencing hearing, summary continued.

In a Nov. 5, 2024, judgment, the trial court imposed a term of community control not to exceed three years, despite the prosecuting attorney’s recommendation of an eight-year prison term.

The prosecutor appealed the court’s decision, arguing it had erred in imposing a sentence that did not include a prison term, despite a presumption that favored a prison term for such an offense.

“The state argues the trial court erred in sentencing appellee to community control without making the findings required by R.C. 2929.13(D)(2). We agree,” Hoffman wrote.

The section of the Revised Code Hoffman referred to notes that a sentence of community control is acceptable for the second-degree felony offense as long as it adequately punishes the offender and protects the public and as long as it doesn’t demean the seriousness of the offense.

The appellate panel reasoned the trial court failed to state a finding relevant to the latter.

“While the trial court stated generally it considered the seriousness factors under R.C. 2929.12, the trial court is required to do so in every case involving felony sentencing,” Hoffman continued. “We do not find the trial court made a finding a community control sanction would not demean the seriousness of the offense because one or more factors indicating appellee’s conduct was less serious than conduct normally constituting the offense … .”

The panel also determined that the trial court’s sentencing entry provided no further guidance. Rather, the judge found Nosrati “amenable” to community control.

“We decline to remand with instructions solely to make findings in support of a community control sanction without giving the trial court an opportunity to reconsider its sentence by applying the correct statutory standard,” Hoffman wrote. “The act of making findings is not merely ministerial in this case. The trial court may upon remand make the requisite findings to support its initial conclusion the presumption of a prison sentence was overcome, and impose a sentence of community control. However, the trial court’s consideration of the required statutory findings may lead it to find the presumption was not overcome in this case.”

The case was remanded to the lower court for resentencing.

Presiding Judge Andrew King and Fifth District Judge Kevin Popham concurred with Hoffman’s opinion.