Court dismisses appeal on weapons charge

The Ohio Fourth District Court of Appeals has dismissed an appeal from a Highland County man convicted on weapons charges. 

According to the court's opinion published online Friday, Robert Gibson appealed his conviction for having weapons under disability. 

"Gibson contends that 1.) he did not knowingly, voluntarily or intelligently enter a guilty plea to the charges; 2.) the trial court abused its discretion when it refused to grant a continuance; and 3.) trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance," according to the court. "However, because the trial court's sentencing entry does not contain the guilty plea, the jury verdict, or the finding of the court upon which the convictions were based, it does not constitute a final, appealable order. Thus, we lack jurisdiction to consider this appeal and must dismiss it."

During the appeal, Gibson was represented by attorney Carol Ann Curren, and the state was represented by the Highland County Prosecutor's Office. 

Gibson, according to the court, was indicted by a grand jury in Highland County Common Pleas Court on one count of tampering with evidence, and one count of having weapons under disability, both felonies of third degree. 

Gibson was ultimately sentenced on the weapons charge, and the remaining count of the indictment was “nolled and dismissed.” After sentencing, Gibson filed this appeal.

The court said that before it could address the merits it first had to be determined if the court had the jurisdiction to do so.

"Here, the (Highland County) court’s sentencing entry does not contain “the guilty plea, the jury verdict, or the finding of the court upon which the conviction is based.” The court simply stated that Gibson “has been found guilty and convicted of: Having Weapons While Under Disability.” The court made no reference to the basis for his conviction. Thus, the court’s entry is not a final, appealable order ... Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for lack of a final, appealable order. However, we note that Gibson “has an adequate remedy at law by way of a motion in the trial court requesting a revised sentencing entry.”