State v. Gaston, 2006-P-0071 (11-21-2007)

{¶ 52} I respectfully dissent.

{¶ 53} While I understand the majority's concern, my reading of the transcript reveals no error when considering the trial court's statements within the context of the sentencing proceeding.

{¶ 54} As the majority correctly notes, "[a]t the hearing appellant's counsel argued that Foster was unconstitutional and requested a sentence lighter than that which was originally imposed." Appellant's argument was based upon the proposition that the Ohio Supreme Court's holding in Foster violated the Ex Post Facto clauses of the United States and Ohio Constitutions, an…