2012 Ohio 2414
Ohio Ct. App.2012Background
- Greathouse was convicted of multiple felonies and, on direct appeal, convictions were affirmed but sentences were reversed under Foster and remanded for resentencing.
- The present record does not show the result of that remand, but Greathouse filed a new motion on October 28, 2011 seeking resentencing due to allied offenses of similar import.
- On November 17, 2011 the trial court overruled the motion, holding the merger issue was barred by res judicata because it had been decided in the prior appeal.
- Greathouse timely appealed the trial court’s ruling.
- The assignment of error asserts entitlement to resentencing when the sentence reflects allied offenses of similar import and argues Johnson should apply.
- The appellate court holds the allied offenses claim is barred by res judicata and Johnson does not apply retroactively.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether allied-offenses merger claim is barred by res judicata | Greathouse contends Johnson should apply. | Greathouse asserts merger must be reconsidered under Johnson. | Barred; res judicata applies; Johnson not retroactive. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Foster, 109 Ohio St.3d 1 (2006-Ohio-856) (required resentencing framework after Foster)
- State v. Perry, 10 Ohio St.2d 175 (1967) (res judicata applicability to multiple adjudications)
- Ali v. State, 104 Ohio St.3d 328 (2004-Ohio-6592) (non-retroactive application of new law after final conviction)
- State v. Johnson, 128 Ohio St.3d 153 (2010-Ohio-6314) (new standard not retroactive to final judgments)
- State v. Rance, 85 Ohio St.3d 632 (1999) (test for allied offenses and merger analysis pre-Johnson)