State v. Feister, 2018 Ohio 2336

Jason K. Feister was indicted for obstructing official business (5th-degree felony) and resisting arrest (misdemeanor); the misdemeanor was later dismissed.
After initial release on bond with GPS monitoring, Feister removed his monitor, fled officers, incurred new misdemeanor charges, and had his bond revoked.
On November 28, 2017 Feister entered a no-contest plea to obstructing official business; a presentence investigation was ordered.
On January 17, 2018 the trial court sentenced Feister to eight months in the county jail to run consecutively to unrelated municipal misdemeanor sentences and awarded 34 days' jail credit for specified custody periods.
The trial court later determined the January 17, 2018 sentence was void under R.C. 2929.16 and vacated it; on May 1, 2018 Feister was resentenced to eight months in the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections, with the same 34 days' credit and no consecutive term.
Feister appealed the January 17, 2018 sentencing entry; the appellate court addressed mootness and rejected Feister's requests for consecutive-sentence relief and additional jail-time credit for unrelated misdemeanor confinement.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court erred by imposing an 8-month local jail term consecutive to unrelated misdemeanor sentences	State maintained the original sentencing entry attempted to run Feister's felony local term consecutive to municipal sentences (but later conceded the original entry was void)	Feister argued the court erred by reserving a residential sanction to follow unrelated misdemeanor imprisonment	Moot: the January 17, 2018 entry was vacated and the May 1, 2018 resentencing imposed an 8-month prison term with no consecutive municipal terms
Whether Feister was entitled to jail-time credit for periods of confinement on unrelated misdemeanor charges	State opposed additional credit where confinement arose from separate, unrelated municipal matters	Feister sought credit for time he spent jailed on separate misdemeanor convictions while the felony charge was pending	Denied: R.C. 2967.191 and precedent permit credit only for confinement arising out of the offense for which the defendant was sentenced; unrelated misdemeanor custody is not creditable

United States v. Alaska S.S. Co., 253 U.S. 113 (1920) (federal courts lack power to decide moot questions)
California v. San Pablo & Tulare R. Co., 149 U.S. 308 (1893) (courts should not decide abstract or moot questions)
North Carolina v. Rice, 404 U.S. 244 (1971) (mootness implicates jurisdiction and must be addressed)
Fortner v. Thomas, 22 Ohio St.2d 13 (1970) (Ohio courts refrain from issuing advisory opinions; decide actual controversies)
Miner v. Witt, 82 Ohio St. 237 (1910) (dismissal of proceedings when events render relief impossible)
Pewitt v. Lorain Corr. Inst., 64 Ohio St.3d 470 (1992) (mootness may be established by extrinsic evidence)
State ex rel. Nelson v. Russo, 89 Ohio St.3d 227 (2000) (courts may take judicial notice of mootness and related events)