State ex rel. Sands v. Bunting (Slip Opinion)
150 Ohio St. 3d 325
| Ohio | 2017Background
- In 2006 Joseph A. Sands was convicted in Lake County Court of Common Pleas of engaging in a pattern of corrupt activity and conspiracy for plotting killings; total sentence 20 years.
- Sands claims the indictment for engaging in a pattern of corrupt activity alleged only a single incident and thus was legally insufficient and void, depriving the trial court of jurisdiction.
- Sands contends he has completed his conspiracy sentence and seeks release via habeas corpus on the ground the pattern-of-corrupt-activity conviction/sentence is void.
- Sands filed a habeas petition in the Third District Court of Appeals; the warden moved to dismiss and the court of appeals granted dismissal.
- The Supreme Court of Ohio considered the appeal and affirmed dismissal.
- The court relied on procedural and substantive bars to relief: failure to file the R.C. 2969.25(A) affidavit and the principle that challenges to indictments and sentencing errors are not cognizable in habeas corpus.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether habeas corpus may be used to attack alleged indictment defect for pattern-of-corrupt-activity charge | Sands: indictment alleged only a single incident and was legally insufficient, so conviction/sentence void and habeas relief appropriate | Warden: habeas cannot be used to challenge the validity or sufficiency of a charging instrument | Dismissal affirmed; indictment challenges not cognizable in habeas corpus |
| Whether sentencing error on pattern-of-corrupt-activity charge renders conviction void and subject to habeas relief | Sands: sentencing errors (or overlap with completed conspiracy sentence) justify immediate release | Warden: sentencing errors are non-jurisdictional and not reviewable in habeas corpus | Dismissal affirmed; sentencing errors are not cognizable in habeas corpus |
| Whether failure to file R.C. 2969.25(A) affidavit requires dismissal | Sands: did not attach the required affidavit | Warden: failure to comply mandates dismissal | Dismissal affirmed; petition dismissed for lack of required affidavit |
| Whether procedural protections (oral argument/motions) affect disposition | Sands requested oral argument and moved to strike brief | Warden: procedural requests do not change merits or dismissal | Court denied oral argument and motion to strike |
Key Cases Cited
- Robinson v. LaRose, 147 Ohio St.3d 473 (procedural dismissal for failure to file statutory affidavit in habeas)
- State ex rel. Arroyo v. Sloan, 142 Ohio St.3d 541 (habeas is not available to challenge charging instrument)
- McGee v. Sheldon, 132 Ohio St.3d 89 (charging-instrument challenges not cognizable in habeas)
- Luna v. Russell, 70 Ohio St.3d 561 (same)
- Dunkle v. Dept. of Rehab. & Corr., 148 Ohio St.3d 621 (sentencing errors are nonjurisdictional and not grounds for habeas relief)
- Shie v. Smith, 123 Ohio St.3d 89 (sentencing error not cognizable in habeas)