State v. Hairston, 2013 Ohio 4634

Sam Hairston was convicted by a jury of aggravated murder (two counts) with firearm specifications after a drug‑deal related shooting that killed two people.
The jury found a capital specification on one count but recommended life with parole eligibility after 30 years; the trial court merged count three into count two and sentenced Hairston to 30 years on the merged aggravated murder count plus a consecutive 3 years for the firearm specification.
This Court previously affirmed Hairston’s conviction on direct appeal.
Years later Hairston moved for resentencing, arguing the sentencing entry was nonfinal because the court did not separately sentence on count three, and separately argued error in the statutory basis for imposing the 3‑year firearm specification term.
The trial court denied the resentencing motion; Hairston appealed and raised two assignments of error challenging finality of the judgment and the statute relied upon for the firearm sentence.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the judgment was nonfinal because the court failed to sentence on count three	Hairston: court had to impose sentence on both counts then merge; failure to sentence on count three renders judgment nonfinal and void	State: allied‑offense law permits conviction and sentencing on only one of allied counts; merger and single sentence is proper	Court: Overruled. Trial court properly merged count three into count two and imposed sentence on one offense; judgment is final
Whether the 3‑year firearm specification sentence was void because court relied on R.C. 2929.14(E) (and related claimed post‑release control error)	Hairston: reliance on R.C. 2929.14(E) made the sentence void under Foster; also alleged post‑release control error	State: claim was not raised on direct appeal and is barred by res judicata	Court: Overruled. Claim barred by res judicata; resentencing not required

State v. Underwood, 124 Ohio St.3d 365 (2010) (only one conviction and sentence permitted for allied offenses of similar import)
State v. Whitfield, 124 Ohio St.3d 319 (2010) (defendant may be tried for allied offenses but sentenced for only one)
State v. Perry, 10 Ohio St.2d 175 (1967) (res judicata bars relitigation of matters raised or that could have been raised on direct appeal)
State v. Foster, 109 Ohio St.3d 1 (2006) (addressed sentencing-law issues following statute changes)
State v. Ketterer, 126 Ohio St.3d 448 (2010) (res judicata principles applied to sentencing claims)