We found that on October 11, 2007, Judge Christine T. McMonagle agreed with DiStasio's lawyer, Thomas A. Rein, that the part of this sentence should be vacated.
Distasio has had internet access since October.Distasio challenges the trial court’s order denying him access to computers with Internet capability and ordering that his mail be screened.
{¶11} A trial court may only impose a sentence as provided for by law. State v. Dillon (1883), 30 Ohio St. 586; State v. Eberling (Apr. 9, 1992), Cuyahoga
App. No. 58559. The punishment allowed by law for rape, kidnapping, gross sexual imposition, corrupting another with drugs, disseminating obscene matter to juveniles, pandering obscenity involving a minor, and possession of criminal tools does not provide for denying computer Internet access and screening mail.
{¶12} Offending parts of sentencing orders may be vacated without a remand for resentencing. Shamaly, supra, at ¶18, citing State v. Evans, 113 Ohio St.3d 100, 2007-Ohio-861, paragraph one of the syllabus; State v. Saxon, 109 Ohio St.3d 176, 2006-Ohio-1245.
Accordingly, that part of the trial court’s order denying Distasio access to a computer with Internet capability and ordering that his mail be screened is vacated.
Sentence affirmed in part; vacated in part; case remanded for correction of sentencing entry.
On May 16, 2008, case number 1:2008cv01220, we see that DiStasio is suing the State of Ohio with a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State).
DiStasio is doing what he, as a prisoner, has a right to do and his lawyer is fulfilling a thankless role that is fundamental to our justice system.http://www.lectlaw.com/def/h001.htm wrote:A writ of habeas corpus is a judicial mandate to a prison official ordering that an inmate be brought to the court so it can be determined whether or not that person is imprisoned lawfully and whether or not he should be released from custody. A habeas corpus petition is a petition filed with a court by a person who objects to his own or another's detention or imprisonment. The petition must show that the court ordering the detention or imprisonment made a legal or factual error.
I thank Mr Rein for pointing out a deficiency in our sentencing process: we don't want judges overstepping the laws.
We may want to look at our state laws. I'm concerned about DiStasio's internet outreach "Ministry" and I don't think internet access in prison should be available to a person convicted of the crimes to which he pled guilty.
It is my hope that we, the people of the State of Ohio, give our judges some options regarding inmate internet access.