State v. Clay
2011 Ohio 5370
Ohio Ct. App.2011Background
- In 2007, Clay was found guilty of murder, child endangering, and felonious assault; sentencing occurred August 21, 2007.
- Clay appealed and the court of appeals affirmed the convictions in 2008.
- On November 18, 2010, a resentencing hearing corrected the court's failure to impose postrelease control.
- A nunc pro tunc entry was issued December 14, 2010 to reflect postrelease control imposition.
- Clay appeals, challenging the December 14, 2010 nunc pro tunc entry as inconsistent with Miller; the court partially affirms and partially vacates.
- The court holds the postrelease-control correction was proper, but any unrelated sentencing changes in the nunc pro tunc entry are vacated.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of nunc pro tunc entry | Clay argues Miller forbids nunc pro tunc correction. | State relies on Fischer allowing void portion correction via nunc pro tunc. | Void portion corrected; unrelated changes vacated; affirmed in part, vacated in part. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Singleton, 124 Ohio St.3d 173 (Ohio 2009) (statutory remedy to correct postrelease-control misimposition)
- State v. Miller, 127 Ohio St.3d 407 (Ohio 2010) (trial court lacks authority to revise final judgment except void or clerical error)
- State v. Fischer, 128 Ohio St.3d 92 (Ohio 2010) (void portion of sentence corrected; postrelease-control issue remedied)