State v. Henderson, 2012 Ohio 2709

Defendant Terrance Henderson was indicted in 2006 for possession of marijuana and subsequently found guilty in 2007, receiving five years’ imprisonment plus 659 days of post-release control time to be served consecutively.
On direct appeal, this court addressed previously imposed post-release control and held certain issues related to PRC were void and remanded for resentencing.
In 2011, the trial court conducted a resentencing hearing on remand and resentenced Henderson to five years in prison with no additional noted PRC concerns beyond the prior remit.
In December 2011 Henderson moved for additional jail-time credit; the trial court ruled it lacked jurisdiction because Henderson had filed a notice of appeal from the resentencing, bypassing that determination.
Henderson appeals, arguing speedy-trial timing, jail-time credit, HB 86 applicability, and court-cost waivers.
The Fifth District affirms, holding the post-release-control errors did not invalidate the sentence and that res judicata barred further challenges to costs and non-PRC aspects.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Speedy-trial entitlement	Henderson contends time between 12/27/2006 and 3/15/2007 counted triple under 2945.71(E) due to PRC violations.	Henderson argues void PRC periods in unrelated cases should be credited as time served.	No error; trial court correctly calculated time; triple-counting applies only to pending charges.
Additional jail-time credit	Credit for void PRC periods should reduce sentence.	Credit cannot be awarded because issues were resolved on remand and not pending at sentencing.	Denied; time credit not applicable due to proceedings on remand and lack of pending charges.
HB 86 applicability at resentencing	HB 86 changes should apply to resentencing.	HB 86 applies only prospectively to unreached portions; PRC remand limited to PRC.	HB 86 not applied; remainder of sentence valid; remand limited to proper postrelease control.
Court costs	Court costs should be waived under HB 86/resentencing.	Res judicata bars reconsideration of non-PRC issues after remand.	Overruled; barred by res judicata in light of remand trajectory; costs disposition affirmed.

State v. Fischer, 2010-Ohio-6238 (Ohio 2010) (de novo sentencing limited to proper imposition of postrelease control)
State v. Bezak, 114 Ohio St.3d 94 (Ohio 2007) (Bezak framework for postrelease-control imposition on remand)
State v. Henderson, 2011-Ohio-1791 (Ohio 2011) (remanded for limited resentencing on PRC; void PRC findings)