State v. Dean
2017 Ohio 7349
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Ralph Dean was convicted in 1982 of aggravated murder and kidnapping; the trial court sentenced him to life with parole eligibility set in the entry and a consecutive 5–15 year kidnapping term.
- Dean appealed; this court affirmed his convictions in 1983; an amended 1983 journal entry changed parole eligibility from 20 to 15 years.
- Dean later moved (2017) arguing no final appealable sentencing entry complying with Crim.R. 32(C) had ever been issued (invoking State v. Baker) and requested a final appealable order.
- The trial court issued a nunc pro tunc entry on April 6, 2017 adding language that the defendant was found guilty by a jury, to cure any Baker defect.
- Dean appealed the nunc pro tunc entry, arguing (1) the court altered his sentence outside his presence and without counsel (Sixth Amendment/Crim.R. 43) and (2) he was entitled to resentencing with counsel present rather than a nunc pro tunc correction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Dean) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the original 1982/1983 entries were final appealable orders under Crim.R. 32(C) | 1982 entry contained sentence, judge signature, clerk stamp; Baker does not require the word "convicted"; Dean had notice and appealed previously | The sentencing entry lacked the explicit "fact of conviction" required by Baker, so no final appealable order existed | Court held the 1982/1983 entries were effectively final; Baker did not mandate the literal word "convicted" and Dean had notice and exhausted direct appeal |
| Proper remedy for a Baker/Crim.R. 32(C) defect | Nunc pro tunc correction is appropriate to reflect what the court originally decided | Dean argued he was entitled to a resentencing hearing with counsel present and opportunities to relitigate issues | Court held the correct remedy is a nunc pro tunc entry correcting a clerical/technical defect, not a new sentencing hearing |
| Whether a nunc pro tunc correction requires the defendant’s presence or appointment of counsel | No hearing or appointment required for a clerical correction under Baker; nunc pro tunc may be entered without calling defendant to court | Dean argued modifying the judgment outside his presence and without counsel violated the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments and Crim.R. 43 | Court held no hearing or appointment of counsel was required for a Rule 32(C) nunc pro tunc correction; issuing the entry did not create a new appealable order |
| Whether Dean may relitigate prior issues after nunc pro tunc correction | The appellate process was already exhausted; res judicata bars re-litigation of issues decided on direct appeal | Dean sought to reset appellate rights to raise speedy trial and Interstate Agreement on Detainers arguments | Court held res judicata prevents relitigation; the nunc pro tunc entry relates back and does not reopen issues already litigated |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Baker, 119 Ohio St.3d 197 (2008) (interpreting Crim.R. 32(C) and requiring sentencing entries to state fact of conviction, sentence, judge signature, and clerk stamp)
- State v. Lester, 130 Ohio St.3d 303 (2011) (clarifying requirements and notification purpose of final judgment under Crim.R. 32(C))
- State ex rel. Snead v. Ferenc, 138 Ohio St.3d 136 (2014) (characterizing Crim.R. 32(C) errors as clerical mistakes correctable nunc pro tunc)
- State ex rel. DeWine v. Burge, 128 Ohio St.3d 236 (2011) (remedy for noncompliant sentencing entry is corrected entry, not resentencing)
- State v. Griffin, 138 Ohio St.3d 108 (2013) (res judicata bars using a Baker-based resentencing entry to relitigate issues already or that could have been raised on direct appeal)