2018 Ohio 2372
Ohio Ct. App.2018Background
- In 1993 Montez J. Long was indicted for aggravated murder with a firearm specification after a fatal shooting. A jury convicted him of aggravated murder in 1996 and found the firearm specification true. The trial court initially sentenced him to 20 years to life plus a mandatory consecutive 3 years for the firearm specification and ordered payment of prosecution costs without stating an amount.
- This court reversed the aggravated-murder conviction for insufficient proof of premeditation, reduced the offense to murder, and remanded for resentencing.
- At the 1997 resentencing hearing the court orally imposed the statutory sentence for murder: 15 years to life plus a mandatory consecutive 3 years for the firearm specification. The court again ordered payment of costs but did not calculate an amount or expressly advise Long of appellate rights or permit allocution.
- More than 20 years later (Oct. 2017) Long filed a motion to void the 1997 sentencing entry, alleging failures to allow allocution, to notify appellate rights, to state parole-eligibility, to state reasons for consecutive/maximum sentences, and improper imposition of costs; he also asserted ineffective assistance of counsel.
- The trial court denied Long’s motion but suspended further collection of court costs during incarceration. Long appealed; the appellate court affirmed, finding procedural omissions harmless or otherwise not grounds for relief given statutory mandatory sentence, res judicata/delay principles, and applicable law on costs and allocution.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Long) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Allocution at resentencing (Crim.R. 32(A)(1)) | Not contested as meritorious; sentence was proper | Court failed to address Long personally or permit allocution, rendering resentencing void or reversible | Error was technical but harmless: sentence was statutorily mandatory so allocution could not have changed outcome; no relief granted |
| Notice of appellate rights at resentencing (Crim.R. 32(B)) | Failure to inform does not void judgment; remedy is motion for delayed appeal, not motion for reconsideration | Court failed to advise Long of appellate rights, entitling him to relief from void sentence | Court erred in failing to advise but judgment not void; Long’s filing 20 years later via reconsideration was improper—no relief |
| Parole eligibility/date and statement of reasons for consecutive/maximum terms | No requirement to calculate parole-eligibility date at sentencing because credits and diminution affect date; parole decisions are for parole authority | Court failed to state parole-eligibility date or reasons for consecutive/maximum sentences | No statutory requirement to state exact parole-eligibility date at sentencing; no relief |
| Imposition of court costs and consideration of ability to pay (R.C. 2947.23; 2929.19) | Costs properly imposed under law in effect; ability to pay irrelevant to imposition though waiver/suspension possible later | Court imposed costs without calculating amount and without considering indigence | Costs were properly imposed; court may later waive/suspend but Long not entitled to relief now; appellate court declined to rule on propriety of trial court’s later suspension of collections |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel (Strickland) | Any counsel omissions did not prejudice outcome because sentence was mandatory | Counsel failed to object to procedural defects at resentencing | Long failed to show deficient performance causing prejudice; claim denied |
| Caption error (civil vs criminal) | Caption error is clerical and harmless | Trial court’s order was captioned "Civil Division," rendering denial improper | Caption mistake was harmless; no relief |
Key Cases Cited
- Krupp v. Poor, 24 Ohio St.2d 123 (Ohio 1970) (discusses when judicial discretion exists at sentencing)
- State v. Osie, 140 Ohio St.3d 131 (Ohio 2014) (allocution error and harmlessness principles)
- State v. Campbell, 90 Ohio St.3d 320 (Ohio 2000) (allocution requirements at sentencing)
- State v. Joseph, 125 Ohio St.3d 76 (Ohio 2010) (costs must be imposed but may later be waived/suspended)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (two-pronged test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- State v. Jackson, 141 Ohio St.3d 171 (Ohio 2014) (res judicata in criminal cases)