State v. Alston
2017 Ohio 8616
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- In 2005 a jury convicted Mark Alston of murder, aggravated robbery, felonious assault, having weapons under disability, tampering with evidence, and related firearm specifications; total sentence 24 years to life.
- Alston's convictions were affirmed on direct appeal; he later filed post-judgment motions unsuccessfully.
- In May 2017 Alston, proceeding pro se, filed a motion to vacate his sentence claiming certain counts were allied offenses of similar import and thus his multiple sentences were void.
- The trial court denied the motion; Alston appealed the denial to the Ninth District Court of Appeals.
- The primary legal question was whether Alston’s claim that his convictions were for allied offenses renders his sentence void under State v. Williams, or whether the claim is barred by res judicata because it could have been raised on direct appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Alston’s sentence is void because he was sentenced on allied offenses of similar import | Alston: convictions for aggravated robbery, murder, and felonious assault are allied; separate sentences are void under State v. Williams | State: trial court made no allied-offense finding; per Williams and Holdcroft, absent a finding the sentence is not void and the claim must be raised on direct appeal; res judicata bars the late challenge | The court held the sentence is not void because the trial court made no allied-offense finding; Alston could have raised the issue on direct appeal and it is now barred by res judicata. Motion to vacate was properly denied. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Szefcyk, 77 Ohio St.3d 93 (1996) (establishes that a final conviction bars raising defenses or claims that were or could have been raised on appeal)
- State v. Williams, 148 Ohio St.3d 403 (2016) (holding that imposing separate sentences for allied offenses is void when the court finds offenses are allied)
- State v. Holdcroft, 137 Ohio St.3d 526 (2013) (explaining that when a court does not find offenses allied, separate sentences are not contrary to law and errors must be raised on appeal)