State v. Maciel-Valadez
2017 Ohio 8266
Ohio Ct. App.2017Background
- Jesus Maciel-Valadez pleaded guilty in three Lorain County criminal cases and was sentenced to prison; each sentencing entry imposed prosecution and court-appointed counsel costs, and two mandatory fines (suspended for indigency).
- Over five years later he moved in each case to terminate collection of costs/fines after receiving prison notices that funds would be withdrawn from his inmate account to satisfy those obligations.
- On November 24, 2015, the trial court granted his motions to terminate and directed that its entries be sent to the prison account clerk; the State did not appeal.
- Maciel-Valadez later moved to return money the prison withdrew in Nov–Dec 2015; the State filed Civ.R. 60(B)(1) motions to vacate the November 24 orders asserting the court mistakenly concluded he owed nothing.
- On March 31, 2016 the trial court granted the State’s Civ.R. 60(B) motions, vacated the November 24 entries, reinstated the payment obligations, and denied return of the withdrawn funds; Maciel-Valadez appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court properly granted the State's Civ.R. 60(B)(1) motions to vacate its November 24, 2015 orders | State: Court made a clerical/mistake permitting relief under Civ.R. 60(B)(1) | Maciel-Valadez: State used Civ.R. 60(B) as a substitute for a timely appeal; the November 24 orders were final and enforceable | Court of Appeals: Reversed — Civ.R. 60(B) cannot substitute for a direct appeal of a judicial/legal error; relief was improper |
| Whether the court erred by denying return of funds withdrawn from inmate account in Nov–Dec 2015 | State: Reinstatement of costs was permitted and collection proper after vacatur | Maciel-Valadez: After November 24 orders (which waived/terminated collection) the prison lacked authority to withdraw funds; those withdrawals must be returned | Court of Appeals: Reversed — funds taken in Nov–Dec 2015 must be returned because they were taken contrary to the November 24 orders (recovery limited to those months) |
Key Cases Cited
- Doe v. Trumbull Cty. Children Servs. Bd., 28 Ohio St.3d 128 (Ohio 1986) (Civ.R. 60(B) may not substitute for timely appeal)
- State v. Calhoun, 86 Ohio St.3d 279 (Ohio 1999) (distinguishes direct criminal appeals from collateral civil attacks)
- State v. Schlee, 117 Ohio St.3d 153 (Ohio 2008) (Civ.R. 60(B) procedure may apply to certain motions in criminal cases)
- Lingo v. State, 138 Ohio St.3d 427 (Ohio 2014) (only a court may assess or alter costs; clerk cannot change a court's judgment)