State v. Swank, Unpublished Decision (7-8-2004)

{¶ 37} I concur in judgment only and write separately because I do not believe that we should ignore the Ohio Supreme Court's holding in State v. Comer.10 State v. Comer holds "a trial court must clearly align each rationale with the specific finding to support its decision to impose consecutive sentences."11 According to this court's most recent pronouncement on the subject in State v. Farraj,12 the failure to do so constitutes reversible error.

{¶ 38} In the past I interpreted Comer less literally in my opinion in State v. Cottrell.13 State v. Cottrell continues to have some support in this…