2016 Ohio 5109
Ohio Ct. App.2016Background
- Donald Jones was convicted of murder in 2006; this court affirmed his conviction on direct appeal in 2007.
- Jones filed multiple postconviction motions (2007, 2010, 2012, 2015); in 2015 he filed a “Motion for Re‑Sentencing Based on Void Judgment.”
- In the 2015 motion he argued (1) the trial court failed to notify him at sentencing that community service could be ordered for nonpayment of prosecution costs (R.C. 2947.23(A)(1)), (2) his Crim.R. 43 right to be present was violated by a 2012 nunc pro tunc remission of costs, and (3) postrelease control was improperly imposed.
- The common pleas court denied the 2015 motion; Jones appealed from that denial. The appeals court dismissed one appeal as duplicative and reviewed the other.
- The court held it lacked jurisdiction under the postconviction statutes to entertain Jones’s late-filed constitutional claims on the merits, but recognized that it always has jurisdiction to correct a void sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Jones) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court failed to notify Jones that community service could be ordered for nonpayment of costs (R.C. 2947.23(A)(1)) | The court argued the denial should stand because the claim was untimely and not properly before the court on appeal | Jones argued he was not notified at sentencing and sought resentencing/remedy | Court did not reach the merits of the statutory-notice claim because it was untimely and outside the court’s appellate/postconviction review jurisdiction |
| Whether Jones’s Crim.R. 43 right to be present was violated by the 2012 nunc pro tunc remission of costs | State maintained the remission and entries did not render the sentence void or warrant relief | Jones argued the nunc pro tunc entry amended sentencing without his presence, violating Crim.R. 43 | Court treated the claim as part of a late postconviction petition and held it lacked jurisdiction to grant relief on the merits |
| Whether trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to the lack of community‑service notification or the costs proceedings | State argued ineffective‑assistance claims were untimely and not properly before the court | Jones claimed Sixth Amendment ineffective assistance for counsel’s failure to object at sentencing | Court held the postconviction statutes govern such claims but Jones filed too late and failed to meet the narrow exceptions; thus no jurisdiction to grant relief |
| Whether postrelease control was properly imposed for murder | State argued postrelease control was properly advised and incorporated in the judgment | Jones argued postrelease control was unauthorized for a special felony like murder | Court held statutory postrelease control did not authorize a mandatory 5‑year term for murder; that portion of the sentence is void and must be corrected |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (ineffective‑assistance standard)
- State v. Fischer, 128 Ohio St.3d 92 (2010) (courts may correct void portion of sentence)
- State v. Clark, 119 Ohio St.3d 239 (2008) (postrelease control not authorized for special felonies like murder)
- State v. Bradley, 42 Ohio St.3d 136 (ineffective‑assistance prejudice standard)
- State v. Williams, 6 Ohio St.3d 281 (Crim.R. 43 and right to be present)