State v. Cortez, 2014 Ohio 3814

John F. Cortez pleaded guilty on January 9, 2009 to 23 counts of unlawful sexual conduct with a minor and one count of corrupting another with drugs; he received an aggregate 16-year prison term and was classified as a Tier II sex offender.
On August 5, 2013 Cortez filed a petition to invalidate his sex-offender classification and a “motion to present plain errors” under Crim. R. 52(B), alleging ineffective assistance of counsel, excessive sentence, improper consecutive-sentence findings, and allied-offenses error.
The trial court concluded Cortez’s Adam Walsh Act–based Tier II classification was void under State v. Williams, but treated his Crim. R. 52(B) filing as a petition for postconviction relief (R.C. 2953.21).
The court dismissed the postconviction petition as untimely (filed well after the 180-day limit) and barred by res judicata for claims that could have been raised on direct appeal.
Cortez appealed, raising three assignments of error: (1) error in converting his motion to correct an illegal sentence into a postconviction petition; (2) error in voiding only the sex-offender classification rather than the entire conviction/sentence; and (3) error denying his ineffective-assistance claim.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Cortez)	Held
Whether the trial court properly converted Cortez’s "motion to correct an illegal sentence" into a postconviction petition	The filing met the statutory definition of a postconviction petition and thus could be treated and reviewed under R.C. 2953.21	The court erred in converting the motion and should have treated it as a motion to correct an illegal sentence	Conversion was proper: the filing met Reynolds factors for a postconviction petition, so the trial court did not err
Whether only the sex-offender classification (vs. entire conviction/sentence) was void	Only the Adam Walsh Act–based classification was void under Williams; conviction and sentence remain valid	The flawed plea and proceedings rendered the entire conviction and sentence void	Court held only the classification was void; collateral challenges to pleas/sentences were untimely and barred by res judicata
Whether ineffective-assistance claims could be reviewed despite timeliness	The ineffective-assistance claim was subject to postconviction time limits and res judicata because it could have been raised on direct appeal	Counsel was ineffective and the court should have considered the claim on its merits	Court held claim untimely under R.C. 2953.21(A)(2) and barred by res judicata; denial affirmed

State v. Williams, 129 Ohio St.3d 344 (2011) (Ohio Supreme Court decision rendering certain Adam Walsh Act classifications void)
State v. Reynolds, 79 Ohio St.3d 158 (1997) (defines when a postconviction petition exists for filings that seek vacation of judgment on constitutional grounds)
State v. Perry, 10 Ohio St.2d 175 (1967) (res judicata bars later claims that could have been raised on direct appeal)