State v. Castile, 2023 Ohio 2860

Castile was indicted in 2011 on multiple counts involving securities fraud, false representation, sale of unregistered securities, and theft; he was convicted at trial and originally sentenced to 13.5 years.
The convictions and sentences spawned a series of direct appeals and remands (Castile I, II, III), resulting in resentencings and an eventual aggregate sentence of 12 years, 9 months.
More than ten years after indictment and over nine years after conviction, Castile filed a pro se motion (Jan. 6, 2022) seeking dismissal of Counts 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, and 7 based on the statute of limitations.
The trial court denied the motion as barred by res judicata, concluding Castile could have raised the statute-of-limitations defense earlier.
Castile argued on appeal that the statute of limitations had expired, rendering the conviction void and therefore excepted from res judicata; the court rejected that claim.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether res judicata bars Castile's late statute-of-limitations challenge to several indictment counts	State: res judicata applies because Castile did not raise the issue at trial or on direct appeal	Castile: expiration of the statute of limitations deprived the trial court of jurisdiction, so the judgment is void and may be attacked anytime	Court: res judicata bars the claim because expiration of the statute of limitations is not a jurisdictional defect and thus does not render the judgment void

State v. Jackson, 141 Ohio St.3d 171 (2014) (res judicata bars issues raised or that could have been raised at trial or on direct appeal)
Daniel v. State, 98 Ohio St.3d 467 (2003) (expiration of a statute of limitations is not a jurisdictional defect)
State ex rel. Tubbs Jones v. Suster, 84 Ohio St.3d 70 (1998) (expiration of statute of limitations does not deprive courts of jurisdiction)
State v. Simpkins, 117 Ohio St.3d 420 (2008) (void judgments may be challenged at any time)