The Fourth Appellate District Court of Ohio has affirmed the judgment against Charles Storms, who was convicted of sexual battery and gross sexual imposition. Storms had appealed the trial court’s decision, arguing that the community notice sanction he received as a Tier III sex offender was unlawful. However, the appellate court ruled that the sanction was authorized by law and, crucially, that Storms’ sentence was part of a plea agreement. This made the issue non-reviewable on appeal.
The Case’s Background
Storms was initially indicted on several sex offense charges involving his minor stepdaughter. These included rape, sexual battery, and gross sexual imposition. The alleged crimes took place between July 2020 and August 2022.
However, Storms and the state entered into plea negotiations. The resulting plea agreement, signed on May 30, 2024, stipulated that Storms would plead guilty to sexual battery and two counts of gross sexual imposition. In exchange, the prosecution would drop the rape charge. The agreement also specified that Storms would be classified as a Tier III sex offender.
The plea agreement included recommended sentences, with Storms agreeing to a minimum prison term of 8 years and a maximum of 12 years for sexual battery, and 5-year prison terms for each count of gross sexual imposition. Storms also agreed to consecutive sentences.
During the combined change of plea and sentencing hearing, the trial court informed Storms about the implications of his guilty pleas, including the possibility of being classified as a Tier I, II, or III sex offender. The court explained that this classification would lead to registration and verification requirements, and potentially, community notification by the Sheriff. The court also made clear the possibility of not residing within 1,000 feet of a school.
The trial court accepted Storms’ guilty pleas and proceeded to sentencing. The court imposed the agreed-upon sentence, which included an aggregate minimum prison term of 18 years and a maximum term of 22 years. The court then provided Storms with a form detailing his duties as a sex offender, as required by Ohio’s Sex Offender Registration and Notification (SORN) laws. The court read the form aloud, and Storms signed it, indicating he understood the terms.
The Uniform Sentencing Entry filed by the trial court on May 30, 2024, explicitly stated that Storms would be subject to community notice due to his Tier III sex offender classification. Storms later attempted to file a delayed appeal, citing issues with mail and finances. The appellate court allowed the appeal to proceed despite the state’s objections.
Storms’ Argument and the Court’s Response
Storms’ primary argument on appeal was that the community notice sanction was contrary to law. He contended that he was only informed during the plea hearing that community notice was a “possibility,” not a certainty. He also claimed that the trial court failed to adequately inform him about the community notice during the sentencing hearing. Storms also noted that he was illiterate and that the SORN form should have been read to him during sentencing, which he claimed it wasn’t.
The state countered that there was no evidence of Storms’ illiteracy, and that the SORN form was indeed read to him during the sentencing hearing. The state argued that the trial court had complied with all legal requirements and that, because the sentence was agreed upon, it was not subject to review.
The appellate court agreed with the state. The court found that the trial court had followed the law regarding informing Storms of his registration duties. The court noted that the record showed the trial court read the SORN form aloud to Storms during the sentencing hearing. Because the court followed the procedure for informing Storms of his duties, the court found the sentence was not unlawful.
The court further emphasized that community notice is a duty of the Sheriff, not the offender. The court found that the trial court was not required to specifically notify Storms during sentencing that he would be subject to community notice.
The court also pointed out that the trial court used the proper SORN form, which Storms signed. The form included a section to indicate if a Tier III sex offender was *not* subject to community notice, but this box was not checked.
The Key Finding: Agreed Sentence
The appellate court’s decision heavily relied on the fact that Storms’ sentence was the result of a plea agreement. Ohio law states that a sentence is not subject to appeal if it is authorized by law, jointly recommended by the defendant and the prosecution, and imposed by the judge. The court cited *State v. McFarland*, which referenced the Supreme Court’s reasoning: a jointly agreed-upon sentence is protected from review because the parties agreed it was appropriate.
Because the sentence was part of a plea agreement, and was authorized by law, the appellate court ruled that it was not subject to review.
The court affirmed the trial court’s judgment, finding no merit in Storms’ assignment of error.