State v. Alexander, 2017 Ohio 8506

Joseph Alexander was convicted in 2002 of felonious assault, kidnapping, and tampering with evidence and received maximum consecutive sentences for each count.
This court previously affirmed his convictions on direct appeal; the Ohio Supreme Court declined review.
In 2016 Alexander filed a pro se motion seeking resentencing and a determination that kidnapping and felonious assault were allied offenses requiring merger under R.C. 2941.25(A).
The trial court treated the motion as a postconviction relief petition, rejected the merger claim, and denied resentencing; Alexander appealed.
The state argued the petition was untimely, barred by res judicata, and was waived at sentencing; the trial court’s denial was affirmed on those alternative grounds.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether felonious assault and kidnapping are allied offenses requiring merger	Alexander: convictions are allied under R.C. 2941.25(A); sentences should merge	State: petition untimely; issue was waived at sentencing and could have been raised on direct appeal (res judicata)	Court: claim barred — untimely and precluded by res judicata; also waived at sentencing; trial court decision affirmed

State v. Williams, 148 Ohio St.3d 403, 71 N.E.3d 234 (2016) (distinguishes void versus voidable sentences and res judicata implications)
State v. Rance, 85 Ohio St.3d 632, 710 N.E.2d 699 (1999) (articulated the former elements-based allied-offense test)
State v. Johnson, 128 Ohio St.3d 153, 942 N.E.2d 1061 (2010) (addressed allied-offense analysis and overruled aspects of prior precedent)
State v. Ruff, 143 Ohio St.3d 114, 34 N.E.3d 892 (2015) (adopted a conduct-based allied-offense test)
State v. Underwood, 124 Ohio St.3d 365, 922 N.E.2d 923 (2010) (discussed when a defendant waives allied-offense claims at sentencing)