State v. Johnson, 2014 Ohio 3027

Ronald G. Johnson pled guilty to one count of burglary (R.C. 2911.12(A)(3)) in Adams County; on June 15, 2006 the court sentenced him to 3 years, consecutive to an 8-year Fayette County sentence. No direct appeal was taken from that judgment.
Johnson repeatedly sought additional jail-time credit: (1) a 2011 motion for correction of jail-time credit (claimed ~340 days) — court awarded 13 days; appeal was filed but dismissed for failure to perfect (Johnson I); (2) a 2012 declaratory-judgment motion (claimed 341 days) — denied; (3) a May 2013 motion to modify sentence as fully served — denied December 18, 2013.
The trial court denied the 2013 motion as a repeat claim that presented no new documentation and relied on issues previously decided.
On appeal, the Fourth District treated the assignment of error as challenging the denial of the 2013 motion and the denial of additional jail credit.
The appellate court affirmed, holding Johnson’s claims were barred by res judicata/postconviction limits and that Johnson failed to supply records showing entitlement to additional credit.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court erred in denying Johnson’s motion to modify his sentence and grant additional jail-time credit	State: trial court correctly denied the repetitive motion; no new evidence; proper application of procedural bars	Johnson: entitled to additional jail-time credit and release because pretrial/confinement time was not applied	Court: denied relief; claims barred by res judicata/postconviction rules and Johnson failed to present records showing entitlement
Whether Johnson could raise jail-credit claims now in postconviction proceedings	State: such claims were either barred or could have been raised earlier; treating as postconviction, claims that could be raised on direct appeal are barred	Johnson: asserts entitlement irrespective of previous procedural posture	Court: applying Reynolds, claims that could have been raised on direct appeal are not cognizable in R.C. 2953.21 proceedings
Whether appellant met his burden to demonstrate entitlement to relief	State: appellant provided no trial-court records or documentation supporting his credit calculation	Johnson: presented handwritten explanations only	Court: appellant failed to carry burden; no evidentiary support for additional credit

State v. Reynolds, 79 Ohio St.3d 158, 679 N.E.2d 1131 (Ohio 1997) (motions to reduce jail time claiming constitutional error may be treated as postconviction proceedings; issues that could have been raised on direct appeal are not reviewable in R.C. 2953.21 proceedings)