State v. Hudson, 2014 Ohio 5363

Rayshaun Hudson was convicted by jury in Dec. 2008 of multiple felonies (including two counts of felonious assault) and sentenced to an aggregate 42 years in prison.
Hudson pursued delayed and reopened appeals; this Court affirmed convictions except it reversed the imposition of court-appointed counsel fees and remanded for resentencing on that issue.
On March 13, 2014 Hudson filed a petition for post-conviction relief under R.C. 2953.21 claiming (1) ineffective assistance of trial counsel for failing to advise him to accept a pretrial plea (10–12 years) and (2) improper post-release control language in his sentence.
The trial court summarily denied the petition as untimely; Hudson appealed. The Court considered jurisdictional timeliness and the void-sentence doctrine.
The Court held Hudson’s ineffective-assistance claim was untimely (no statutory excuse shown) and therefore not reached on the merits; but it agreed post-release control was improperly imposed and vacated that portion of the sentence, remanding for resentencing limited to correct post-release control.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Hudson’s petition for post-conviction relief alleging ineffective assistance based on plea advice was timely and properly considered	Hudson argued petition was timely because his reopened direct appeal resulted in recent transcript activity and appellate counsel obtained transcript in Jan. 2014	State argued petition was untimely under R.C. 2953.21(A)(2) because the trial transcript was filed in Oct. 2012 and Hudson gave no statutory excuse	Petition untimely; Hudson did not show statutory basis to excuse untimeliness, so court lacked jurisdiction to reach ineffective-assistance claim (assignment overruled)
Whether the trial court’s post-release control notification was legally sufficient	Hudson argued the sentencing entry and oral statement misstated post-release control as "up to three years," rendering sentence void	State conceded the PRC notification was improper	Court held PRC was improperly imposed; that portion of sentence is void and must be vacated; remanded for resentencing only on post-release control

State v. Gondor, 112 Ohio St.3d 377, 2006-Ohio-6679 (Ohio 2006) (post-conviction proceedings are collateral civil attacks; scope of rights in post-conviction is statutory)
State v. Steffen, 70 Ohio St.3d 399 (Ohio 1994) (post-conviction remedies are statutory, not constitutional)
State v. Calhoun, 86 Ohio St.3d 279 (Ohio 1999) (same principle on post-conviction statutory rights)
State v. Fischer, 128 Ohio St.3d 92, 2010-Ohio-6238 (Ohio 2010) (failure to properly impose post-release control renders that part of the sentence void and subject to vacation)
State v. Holdcroft, 137 Ohio St.3d 526, 2013-Ohio-5014 (Ohio 2013) (void-sentence principle for improper post-release control reaffirmed)
State v. Holcomb, 184 Ohio App.3d 577, 2009-Ohio-3187 (Ohio App. 9th Dist.) (trial court or reviewing court must vacate and resentence where post-release control is void)