State v. Bayless, 2014 Ohio 2475

June 2012: Joshua Bayless indicted for illegal assembly/possession of chemicals for manufacture of drugs (third-degree felony).
After a two-day jury trial Bayless was convicted; before sentencing his original trial counsel withdrew and new counsel was appointed.
Bayless asserted at sentencing (through new counsel) that original trial counsel was ineffective for failing to advise him of plea offers and the mandatory five-year term applicable under R.C. 2925.041(C)(1); the court imposed the mandatory five-year sentence based on two prior felony drug convictions.
Bayless did not file a direct appeal or seek leave for a delayed appeal from his conviction or sentence.
Nearly seven months after sentencing, Bayless filed a petition for postconviction relief repeating the ineffective-assistance claims; the trial court dismissed the petition as barred by res judicata.
Bayless appealed the dismissal; the court of appeals affirmed, holding res judicata barred his claims because they could have been raised on direct appeal and no new competent evidence outside the record was offered.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Bayless's postconviction ineffective-assistance claims were barred by res judicata	Bayless argued the petition alleged facts outside the record showing trial counsel failed to inform him of plea offers and mandatory sentence, so res judicata should not apply	State argued Bayless, represented by counsel, could have raised these claims on direct appeal and presented no new outside-the-record evidence to avoid res judicata	Court held res judicata bars the claims because the issues existed and were available to be raised on direct appeal and no competent, relevant, outside-the-record evidence was presented

State v. Calhoun, 86 Ohio St.3d 279 (establishes postconviction relief as collateral, not a direct appeal)
State v. Hancock, 108 Ohio St.3d 57 (discusses standard of review and principles applicable to postconviction proceedings)