2019 Ohio 4735
Ohio Ct. App.2019Background
- Dion Lamarr Jackson, Sr. was indicted on multiple counts arising from two Dollar General robberies; a jury convicted him of two counts (Counts Five and Six) and he was sentenced to seven years' imprisonment.
- Jackson appealed; this court affirmed his convictions in an August 13, 2018 opinion.
- The trial transcript was filed in the court of appeals on January 10, 2018, making a timely postconviction petition due by January 10, 2019.
- Jackson filed a pro se petition for postconviction relief on January 14, 2019, alleging insufficiency of evidence, stacked witness testimony, ineffective assistance of counsel, and counsel’s failure to present exculpatory witnesses/evidence.
- The trial court denied the petition as untimely. On appeal Jackson raised (1) severance, (2) removal of public defender, and (3) motion for acquittal arguments.
- The appellate court affirmed, holding the petition untimely, Jackson made no showing of unavoidable prevention or a new retroactive right, and some claims were barred by res judicata.
Issues
| Issue | State's Argument | Jackson's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness / Jurisdiction of postconviction petition | Petition filed after 365-day deadline; no statutory excuse shown, so court lacks jurisdiction to reach merits | Petition raises serious constitutional errors and ineffective assistance warranting relief | Petition untimely (filed Jan 14, 2019); Jackson failed to show unavoidable prevention or a new retroactive right; court lacked jurisdiction to address merits |
| Res judicata as a bar to claims (severance; sufficiency) | Claims were raised or could have been raised on direct appeal and are therefore barred | Claims are meritorious and should be considered in postconviction proceeding | Claims previously raised on direct appeal are barred by res judicata and need not be reconsidered |
| Alleged failure of trial counsel to present evidence (e.g., video, report) | Evidence cited by Jackson was available before deadline and was referenced at sentencing; not newly discovered | Counsel failed to present key exculpatory evidence and thus rendered ineffective assistance | Jackson did not allege unavoidable prevention; arguments rely on facts known before filing deadline and are untimely/unexcused |
| Motion to remove public defender / counsel-performance claim | Complaint about counsel’s omissions is based on record facts known at trial and sentencing, not newly discovered facts | Denial to remove public defender prejudiced defense and warrants relief | Claim is untimely and not supported as newly discovered; cannot be considered on untimely petition |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Szefcyk, 77 Ohio St.3d 93 (1996) (a defendant represented by counsel is barred from raising in postconviction relief issues that were or could have been raised at trial or on direct appeal)
- State v. Apanovitch, 155 Ohio St.3d 358 (2018) (failure to satisfy R.C. 2953.23(A) deprives a trial court of jurisdiction to adjudicate the merits of an untimely or successive postconviction petition)