In State v. Morris, Highland App. No. 04CA20, 2005 Ohio 2980, the defendant was sentenced to a prison term for committing a felony, and sentenced to a consecutive prison term pursuant to R.C. 2929.141 for violating post-release control. He appealed, challenging the sentence imposed pursuant to R.C. 2929.141, "only to the extent that the court ordered it to be served consecutively." Citing Blakely v. Washington (2004), 542 U.S. 296, 124 S.Ct. 2531, 159 L. Ed. 2d 403, the defendant argued that imposition of consecutive sentences under this section violated his right to a jury trial, as it required judicial fact-finding. The court of appeals did not address whether the R.C. 2929.14(E)(4) consecutive factors are applicable when sentencing pursuant to R.C. 2929.141. Rather, citing its earlier decisions, the court simply held that Blakely has no application to Ohio's sentencing scheme, and affirmed the imposition of consecutive sentences. Citing its decision in Foster, the Ohio Supreme Court summarily reversed the decision of the court of appeals and remanded the matter for resentencing. See In re Ohio Criminal Sentencing Statutes Cases, 109 Ohio St. 3d 313, 2006 Ohio 2109, P83, 847 N.E.2d 1174.