Full Opinion

[Cite as Conneaut v. Keen, 2026-Ohio-4434.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO ELEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT ASHTABULA COUNTY CITY OF CONNEAUT, CASE NOS. 2026-A-0031 2026-A-0032 Plaintiff-Appellee, - vs - Criminal Appeals from the Conneaut Municipal Court SHAUN KEEN, Defendant-Appellant. Trial Court Nos. 2021 CRB 00194 2021 CRB 00413 OPINION AND JUDGMENT ENTRY Decided: November 9, 2026 Judgment: Affirmed John D. Lewis, Law Director, City of Conneaut, 294 Main Street, Conneaut, OH 44030 (For Plaintiff-Appellee). Margaret Brunarski, Ashtabula County Public Defender, and Phillip L. Heasley, Assistant Public Defender, Ashtabula County Public Defender’s Office, 22 East Jefferson Street, Jefferson, OH 44047 (For Defendant-Appellant). SCOTT LYNCH, J. {¶1} Defendant-appellant, Shaun Keen, appeals the sentences imposed by the Conneaut Municipal Court for probation violations. Finding that the sentences imposed were not vindictive or otherwise violative of due process, they are affirmed. Substantive and Procedural History {¶2} In Conneaut Municipal Court Case No. 21CRB00194, Keen pled guilty to Assault and received a one hundred eighty day jail sentence with one hundred sixty-eight days suspended and credit for twelve days served, and two years of supervised community control. Three probation violation complaints were subsequently issued. {¶3} In Conneaut Municipal Court Case No. 21CRB00413, Keen pled guilty to Domestic Violence, receiving a one hundred eighty day jail sentence with one hundred seventy days suspended and credit for eight days served, and two years of supervised community control; and to Aggravated Menacing receiving a suspended one hundred eighty day jail sentence and two years of supervised community control. Again, three probation violation complaints were subsequently issued. {¶4} On March 30, 2026, a preliminary revocation hearing was held. Probation Officer Shaun Benoit testified that the violations arose from Keen’s failure, following his release from the Conneaut City Jail on March 5, 2025, to maintain contact with the adult probation department and to keep the department updated with his contact information. Keen pled guilty to the violations. {¶5} The following exchange occurred between Keen and the municipal court prior to the imposition of sentence: The Court: Okay. We will now proceed to sentencing, Mr. Keen. Before I impose sentence, is there anything you would like to say? The Defendant: Yes, sir. I tried to get ahold of the Conneaut, ah, department thing, but, ah, I was never able to get up with them, and I’ve never been back in the -- in the City of Conneaut and I’ve been staying out of trouble and been in Ashtabula this whole time. And, I mean, if I could get my probation transferred to Ashtabula, it would be one thing, but I just don’t -- never have a way to come to your city and I can’t get never get out here. But I did try to contact them at first. The Court: Ah, what does at first mean? PAGE 2 OF 8 Case Nos. 2026-A-0031, 2026-A-0032 The Defendant: Like, when I first got out of prison [sic], when you first released me, to take and get it switched to Ashtabula, and I was never able to get up with this probation officer and so I just never contacted him no more. The Court: So, are you going to tell me how you tried to contact the probation department? The Defendant: Yeah. I tried to contact them through telephone. The Court: Do you remember when exactly that happened? The Defendant: No, not the exact date. But it was, like, the first week that I got out, when I got out in -- I think it was in May I was released from here. The Court: May of 2025? The Defendant: Yes, sir. ‘Cause I was in prison, remember? I was in prison when this probation violation was issued and, ah, ‘cause I was in Conneaut prison. And then that’s when I was arrested, when I was in your city, and then basically I was told to take and make contact with this man right here. And I tried to contact him when I went back to Ashtabula, and I could never get ahold of nobody. And I knew then I had a warrant. The Court: So, you tried to contact him one time? The Defendant: Yeah, one time I’ve tried to contact him. I know it’s not enough, sir. I already know. I’m not going to argue with that. I understand that. The Court: Okay. Are there any holders on him, officer? Officer Benoit: No. The Defendant: And I’ve been doing good. I’ve got a job now, sir. I’m being a productive citizen, like you asked me to do, and I’ve been staying out of trouble, out of the way. The Court: Where -- where are you working? The Defendant: For a little construction company, like, Eugene Cottom’s Construction, or something like that. The Court: Something like that? PAGE 3 OF 8 Case Nos. 2026-A-0031, 2026-A-0032 The Defendant: Yeah, it’s something like that. I don’t -- I just know the man that I work for. The Court: Okay. Is it, like, full-time, or what -- The Defendant: No, it’s part-time. The Court: Where do you live? What’s your address? The Defendant: 789 Center Street. The Court: In Ashtabula? The Defendant: Yes, sir. The Court: And you’ve been living there ever since you got released from jail? The Defendant: Yes, sir. The Court: Is there anything else you’d like to say, Mr. Keen? The Defendant: No, sir. The Court: Okay. Officer Benoit. Officer Benoit: Your Honor, I haven’t had any contact with Mr. Keen. I’ve even left -- went down to the jail, got the phone number that he had, called, left a voicemail on that phone number. I went to his address, 387 Washington Street; no, ah, contact. Looked up his address that he gave me at 1221 Division Place in Ashtabula; that’s a fictitious address. The Defendant: No, it’s not. That’s my grandma’s. That’s my grandma’s address, 1221 Division. Officer Benoit: And then, just as a brief history on him -- The Defendant: I never got no papers him or nothing [sic]. The Court: Mr. Keen -- Mr. Keen, let the officer finish. The Defendant: Okay. PAGE 4 OF 8 Case Nos. 2026-A-0031, 2026-A-0032 The Court: Stop interrupting him. The Defendant: I’m sorry. The Court: Go ahead. Officer Benoit: (Unintelligible) his file real quick, Your Honor. October 20th, 2021, failure to reporting; December 25th, 2021, failure to reporting; February 8th of 2022, he had a warrant issued for failure to reporting; September 13th of 2022, failure to reporting; September 20th of 2022, there was a warrant for failure to reporting; and then on April 29th, 2025, one for once again failure to reporting and keep Adult Probation updated. The Court: Okay. Now -- thank you. Now, you wanted to say something, Mr. Keen? The Defendant: Yeah. That 1221 Division Place Street is my grandmother’s address, and I never received no paperwork from there or anything. That’s why I just never -- I never -- I just thought as long as I wasn’t getting in trouble, everything was fine and dandy. ‘Cause like I said, I tried to call, contact him one time, but there was no -- nobody ever get back to me. And the addresses in Conneaut is where I was living at prior to, you know, when I got out of jail, and so, I mean, there wouldn’t have been nobody there to contact me. That’s why I gave the 1221 Division Street for my grandmother’s address. The Court: Mr. Keen, I mean, you act like I -- I was born yesterday. The Defendant: No. I’m not saying that, sir. That’s why I pled guilty. The Court: Shut up. Shut up. I want you to shut up and listen to me. I’ve been doing this for 37 years. I mean, I -- you know, you act like I -- shut up and you listen to me. The way you’re explaining yourself, you act like -- like we have no clue what we’re doing here, and -- and, you know, it’s -- it’s offensive. It’s offensive. You have been in the system. You know what is required of you. You know. Don’t act like you don’t know. You know you have to report to Probation. You know you have to keep them advised of your current address. It’s your responsibility. It’s not his responsibility or any probation officer’s responsibility to find you and hunt you down. It’s yours. This is your third Probation Violation Complaint filed against you in these cases. Three strikes, you’re out. PAGE 5 OF 8 Case Nos. 2026-A-0031, 2026-A-0032 {¶6} The municipal court proceeded to order Keen unsuccessfully terminated from supervised community control; ordered him to serve three hundred thirty-eight days in jail with two days of credit in Case No. 21CRB00413 consecutively to one hundred sixty-two days in jail with two days of credit in Case No. 21CRB00194. Assignment of Error {¶7} Although Keen asserts that the municipal court’s sentence should be reviewed under a clear and convincing standard, that standard as well as the authorities cited in support of its application apply to felony rather than misdemeanor sentencing. In the context of misdemeanor sentencing, “[a]n appellate court reviews a trial court’s imposition of community-control sanctions under an abuse-of-discretion standard.” State v. Ballish, 2026-Ohio-503, ¶ 10; State v. Tackett, 2026-Ohio-3514, ¶ 9 (11th Dist.) (“[m]isdemeanor sentencing lies within the discretion of the trial court and will not be disturbed absent an abuse of discretion”) (citation omitted). No Evidence of Vindictive Sentencing {¶8} Keen asserts that “[t]he trial court’s comments at sentencing clearly and convincingly display that the court engaged in vindictive sentencing against Shaun Keen.” In particular, the court repeatedly told him to “shut up” while “he attempted to explain he was taking accountability” and “explain himself further.” Brief of Defendant-Appellant at 8-10. {¶9} We find no evidence of vindictiveness or any improper motivation. The municipal court provided Keen with several opportunities to speak and address the violations, both before and after Officer Benoit stated the basis thereof. By his own admission, Keen acknowledged his efforts to contact the probation department were PAGE 6 OF 8 Case Nos. 2026-A-0031, 2026-A-0032 insufficient. Not once, but three times Keen was cited for violating this basic condition of his community control. It is certainly not an abuse of discretion to characterize Keen’s profession that everything was “fine and dandy” as long as he stayed out of trouble as offensive. Finally, the order for Keen to “shut up” appears to merely reflect the court’s desire to speak without interruption. Compare State v. Fromknecht, 2023-Ohio-4604, ¶ 12 (11th Dist.) (“[w]e do not find the foregoing [foreclosure of the defendant from speaking further] to be demonstrative of vindictiveness but, rather, the municipal court’s impatience with Fromknecht’s interruption”). {¶10} The sole assignment of error is without merit. {¶11} For the foregoing reasons, the sentences imposed by the Conneaut Municipal Court on Keen for probation violations are affirmed. Costs to be taxed against the appellant. EUGENE A. LUCCI, J., ROBERT J. PATTON, J., concur. PAGE 7 OF 8 Case Nos. 2026-A-0031, 2026-A-0032 JUDGMENT ENTRY For the reasons stated in the Opinion of this court, the assignment of error is without merit. The order of this court is that the judgment of the Conneaut Municipal Court is affirmed. Costs to be taxed against the appellant. JUDGE SCOTT LYNCH JUDGE EUGENE A. LUCCI, concurs JUDGE ROBERT J. PATTON, concurs THIS DOCUMENT CONSTITUTES A FINAL JUDGMENT ENTRY A certified copy of this opinion and judgment entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to Rule 27 of the Ohio Rules of Appellate Procedure. PAGE 8 OF 8 Case Nos. 2026-A-0031, 2026-A-0032