Date: 10-16-2024

Case Style:

State of Ohio v. Quincy Watson

Case Number: 23CA25

Judge: Not Available

Court: Court of Common Pleas, Pickaway County, Ohio

Plaintiff's Attorney: Pickaway County Ohio District Attorney's Office

Defendant's Attorney:

Click Here For The Best Circleville Criminal Defense Lawyer Directory

Description:

Circleville, Ohio aggravated trafficking in drugs and illegal conveyand of drugs of abuse onto the grounds of a detention facility criminal defense lawyer.

{¶2} On May 4, 2023, Watson was indicted on nine felony counts as follows:

Count One: Complicity to aggravated trafficking in drugs with specification in violation of R.C. 2923.03 and 2925.03(A)(1) and (C)(1)(f), a first-degree felony;

Count Two: Complicity to aggravated trafficking in drugs with specification in violation of R.C. 2923.03 and 2925.03(A)(2) and (C)(1)(e), a first-degree felony;

Count Three: Complicity to illegal conveyance of drugs of abuse onto the grounds of a detention facility or institution in violation of R.C. 2923.03 and 2921.36(A)(2), a third-degree felony;

Count Four: Engaging in a pattern of corrupt activity in violation of R.C. 2923.32(A)(1), a first-degree felony;

Count Five: Complicity to trafficking in marihuana in violation of R.C. 2923.03 and 2925.03(A)(1) and (C)(3)(c), a fourth-degree felony;

Count Six: Complicity to trafficking in marihuana in violation of R.C. 2923.03 and 2925.03(A)(2) and (C)(3)(c), a fourth-degree felony;

Count Seven: Complicity to illegal conveyance of drugs of abuse onto the grounds of a detention

3

facility or institution in violation of R.C. 2923.03 and 2925.03(A)(1) and (C)(1)(f), a third-degree felony;

Count Eight: Complicity to aggravated trafficking in drugs with specification in violation of 2923.03 and 2925.03(A)(1) and (C)(1)(f), a first-degree felony; and

Count Nine: Complicity to aggravated trafficking in drugs with specification in violation of R.C. 2923.03 and 2925.03(A)(2) and (C)(1)(f), a first-degree felony.[1]

Watson initially entered pleas of not guilty to the charges and the matter proceeded towards trial.

{¶3} Thereafter, Watson entered into plea negotiations with the State that resulted in him entering guilty pleas to an amended Count Two of the indictment, as well as Count Three of the indictment, in exchange for the dismissal of the remaining counts of the indictment. More specifically, the trial court permitted Count Two of the indictment to be amended to charge Watson with complicity to aggravated trafficking in drugs in violation of R.C. 2923.03(A)(2) and 2925.03(A)(2) and (C)(1)(c), which is a third-degree felony rather than a first-degree felony as originally charged. The trial court also permitted Count Two to be amended to remove the major drug offender specification. Thus, Watson
agreed to plead guilty to two third-degree felony offenses in exchange for the dismissal of the remaining seven counts in the indictment. Watson's plea form notified him that the maximum prison term for each third-degree felony count was 36 months and the trial court orally advised him of the same during the change-of-plea hearing that was held on August 2, 2023. The trial court ordered that a pre-sentence investigation be prepared and set the matter for sentencing at a later date.

{¶4} Watson was sentenced on October 25, 2023. Prior to imposing sentence, the trial court referenced its receipt and review of the pre-sentence investigation report that had been prepared. The report detailed the scheme in which Watson played a role whereby several inmates and nurses at the Pickaway Correctional Institution conspired together, in conjunction with Watson and several other people that were not incarcerated, to illegally convey drugs into the correctional facility. The pre-sentence investigation report also detailed Watson's prior conviction for involuntary manslaughter and attendant prison sentence, as well as a long list of infractions committed while he was in prison for that offense.[2]The trial court heard sentencing arguments by both Watson and the State. Defense counsel requested that Watson be sentenced to probation only, citing Watson's limited role in the illegal conveyance scheme. The State argued that Watson should be sentenced to concurrent 24-month prison terms on each count. The trial court also permitted Watson to make a statement in mitigation of sentencing.

{¶5} The trial court ultimately sentenced Watson to 36-month prison terms on each count, to be served consecutively. Prior to imposing sentence, the following exchange took place between the court and Watson:

THE DEFENDANT: * * * I take full responsibility, you know, on the part that I played, you know, in this situation. Like I say, since I've been out, I've been trying to restore my life all the time I did from a juvenile, and I wish to continue to grow in his work and rebuild my life. Like I said, I take full responsibility.

THE COURT: Well, you received a substantial break in this case, Mr. Watson. As indicated by your attorney, when the State, for whatever reason, elected to reduce this from nine charges to two.

THE DEFENDANT: Yes, Sir.

THE COURT: So that's the consideration. You got that from them, not me. When I look at what was going on down here, you know, when you send people to prison you anticipate they're going to do their time and not continue to be active in crimes. And then you get in there and start this stuff. Not in my county.

THE DEFENDANT: Yes, Sir.

THE COURT: You know, I didn't put those prisons in Pickaway County, but I have to deal with them. This just goes too far.

{¶6} The court then went on to impose the sentences, stating as follows:

The court has considered the record and the presentence report as prepared as well as the principles and purposes of sentencing under R.C. 2929.11, and has balanced the seriousness and recidivism factors under R.C. 2929.12, and finds the appropriate sentence in this case is thirty-six months on each of these, and that they be consecutive.

{¶7} The court further made the necessary consecutive-sentencing findings, including that consecutive sentences were necessary to protect the public from future crime and to punish the offender, that consecutive sentences were not disproportionate to the seriousness of the offender's conduct and the danger he posed to the public, and that the offender's history of criminal conduct demonstrated that consecutive sentences were necessary to protect the public from future crime. A sentencing entry was filed on October 27, 2023, and it is from that order that Watson filed his appeal, setting forth a single assignment of error for our review.

State v. Watson, 2024 Ohio 4992, 23CA25 (Ohio App. Oct 16, 2024)

Outcome: Affirmed

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments: