State v. Lynn, 2017 Ohio 8355

Lynn was indicted in 2010 on multiple charges and pleaded guilty to one count of rape with a sexually violent predator specification; other charges were dismissed.
He moved to withdraw his plea multiple times; the trial court denied those motions and sentenced him to 15 years to life in 2011.
The trial court initially failed to notify Lynn of mandatory post-release control at sentencing; the court later held a resentencing hearing in 2014 to inform him of post-release control.
Lynn pursued several post-plea motions and appeals; many filings were untimely or otherwise procedurally barred.
In March 2017 Lynn filed a "motion to correct an illegal sentence;" the trial court treated it as a petition for post-conviction relief under R.C. 2953.21, found it untimely, and dismissed it for lack of jurisdiction.
Lynn appealed; the appellate court affirmed, holding the motion was properly treated as a post-conviction petition, untimely, and barred by res judicata as to matters available on direct appeal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Judicial fact-finding to enhance sentence	Trial court relied on impermissible judicial fact-finding to increase sentence above minimum	Lynn argued the court engaged in unconstitutional fact-finding	Not addressed on merits — deemed moot because petition was dismissed as untimely
Sentencing under unauthorized statute	Sentence was imposed under an unauthorized statute, rendering it illegal	Lynn contended his sentence was contrary to law	Not addressed on merits — moot due to dismissal
Motion recast as post-conviction petition (timeliness)	Trial court erred by treating the motion to correct illegal sentence as a post-conviction petition	Lynn argued his motion challenged a void sentence and should not be governed by R.C. 2953.21 time limits	Court held the motion was properly construed as a post-conviction petition and was untimely; dismissal affirmed
Failure to notify of R.C. 2947.23 and right to appeal	Trial court failed to notify Lynn of statutory filing-fee/posting requirements and of right to direct appeal	Lynn argued lack of notice deprived him of rights and supports relief	Not addressed on merits — moot because petition was dismissed as untimely

State v. Reynolds, 79 Ohio St.3d 158, 679 N.E.2d 1131 (1997) (a postconviction petition label does not control substance; court looks to function of the filing)
State v. Calhoun, 86 Ohio St.3d 279, 714 N.E.2d 905 (1999) (R.C. 2953.21 provides the exclusive collateral remedy and governs postconviction petitions)
State v. Steffen, 70 Ohio St.3d 399, 639 N.E.2d 67 (1994) (postconviction relief is a collateral civil attack governed by statute, not a constitutional right)
State v. Saxon, 109 Ohio St.3d 176, 826 N.E.2d 824 (2006) (issues available on direct appeal are barred from postconviction review by res judicata)