State v. Carter
2019 Ohio 1749
Ohio Ct. App.2019Background
- Brandon Carter was indicted on multiple counts (aggravated robbery, robbery, felonious assault, firearm charge); jury convicted him of robbery (count 2) in 2015 and deadlocked on other counts; sentenced on count 2.
- In 2016, facing retrial on deadlocked counts, Carter pled guilty to robbery as a lesser-included offense of an aggravated-robbery count (count 3); remaining charges were dismissed; he did not appeal the 2016 plea.
- In May 2017 Carter filed a pro se “Motion for Relief from Judgment (Civ.R. 60(B)(5))” asserting due-process and double-jeopardy violations, and a separate “Motion for Recusal” asking the trial judge to recuse from ruling on the postconviction motion.
- The trial court overruled both motions; Carter appealed. The court of appeals affirmed the overruling but modified the judgment to reflect dismissal of the Civ.R. 60(B) motion.
- The court held the Civ.R. 60(B) pleading was actually a postconviction petition reviewable under R.C. 2953.21 et seq.; the court lacked jurisdiction to entertain a late challenge to the 2015 conviction and res judicata barred the 2016 challenge.
- The court declined to reach the merits of the recusal claim because authority to decide judge-disqualification lies exclusively with the Ohio Chief Justice or designee.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Carter) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Proper procedural vehicle for relief | The court may treat the pleading as a postconviction petition and apply R.C. 2953.21 | Civ.R. 60(B) applies to obtain relief for constitutional violations | Court: motion was actually a postconviction petition subject to R.C. 2953.21 (Civ.R.60(B) inapplicable) |
| Timeliness / jurisdiction re: 2015 conviction | 2015 conviction challenge was untimely under R.C. 2953.21(A)(2) | Motion timely or substantive constitutional defect excused delay | Court: transcript filed Oct 2015; motion filed May 2017 — outside 365-day limit; Carter failed to meet narrow exceptions; no jurisdiction to entertain 2015 claim |
| Merits / res judicata re: 2016 plea conviction | 2016 conviction subject to postconviction review but claims must be supported by evidence beyond record or appealed directly | Retrial procedure and double-jeopardy/due-process claims invalidate 2016 plea | Court: 2016 challenge was timely but barred by res judicata because it could have been raised on direct appeal from the 2016 plea; dismissible without hearing |
| Recusal / disqualification of trial judge | Motion for recusal should have been granted; trial judge lacked impartiality | Trial court properly ruled; appellate review improper | Court: appellate court lacks jurisdiction to review common-pleas disqualification decisions (only Chief Justice/designee can); did not reach merits |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Schlee, 117 Ohio St.3d 153 (motion seeking relief from criminal conviction must be reviewed under postconviction statutes)
- State v. Perry, 10 Ohio St.2d 175 (res judicata bars claims not raised on direct appeal)
- Beer v. Griffith, 54 Ohio St.2d 440 (only Ohio Chief Justice or designee may pass on disqualification of common-pleas judges)
- State v. Osie, 140 Ohio St.3d 131 (reaffirming exclusive authority of Chief Justice on disqualification; distinguishing claims inextricably entwined with other issues)
- State v. Dean, 127 Ohio St.3d 140 (judicial-bias claim may be considered when inextricably entwined with other claims)
- Dunbar v. State, 136 Ohio St.3d 181 (judgment voidness limited; most constitutional errors do not render conviction void)