State v. Kane
2017 Ohio 7838
Ohio Ct. App.2017Background
- Angela Kane, a registered nurse who ran Smart Choice Home Health, pleaded guilty to one count of falsification in a theft offense for billing Medicaid for home‑health services she alleged were provided by a licensed home health aide.
- At sentencing (Jan. 8, 2015) Kane received five years community control and $150,000 restitution; she did not timely appeal.
- On August 5, 2016 Kane filed a petition for postconviction relief (R.C. 2953.21) claiming trial counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate, withhold discovery, misadvise her about applicable Medicaid rules, and fail to interview a witness (Lesles Rivera). She sought an evidentiary hearing.
- The State moved to dismiss as untimely under R.C. 2953.21 and 2953.23; the trial court found the petition filed more than 365 days after the appeal period and concluded Kane failed to show she was "unavoidably prevented" from discovering the facts supporting her claim.
- The court denied the petition without an evidentiary hearing; Kane appealed and this court affirmed, holding the trial court lacked jurisdiction over the untimely petition because Kane did not meet the R.C. 2953.23(A)(1)(a) exception.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Kane) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court erred by denying an evidentiary hearing on an untimely postconviction petition | Kane's petition is untimely and she did not show she was unavoidably prevented from discovering the facts needed to raise ineffective-assistance claims | Trial counsel ineffectiveness (bad advice, failure to investigate/interview Rivera, withheld discovery) and Kane only recently realized legal basis for relief, so she should get a hearing | Held: No error; petition untimely and Kane failed to show she was unavoidably prevented from discovering the factual basis for her claims, so court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the petition; no hearing required |
Key Cases Cited
(There are no authorities cited in this opinion with official reporter citations.)
