2018 Ohio 1873
Ohio Ct. App.2018Background
- In 2006 Madrid pled (Alford) guilty to aggravated robbery and involuntary manslaughter; court orally notified him he would be subject to five years mandatory postrelease control but the journal entry did not state the five-year term.
- In 2014 Madrid was indicted for drug and weapons offenses occurring while he was on postrelease control from the 2006 case.
- Madrid pleaded no contest to reduced drug charges; at sentencing the trial court imposed a total prison term of 44 months and added 1,361 days for the postrelease-control violation.
- In October 2017 Madrid moved to vacate the 1,361-day judicial-sanction sentence, arguing Grimes required the original 2006 journal entry to state the five-year postrelease-control term, and that omission voided the sanction.
- The trial court denied the motion, citing (1) that Grimes should not be applied retroactively to final cases, (2) statutory language (R.C. 2967.28(B)) preserving postrelease-control terms despite journal omissions, and (3) res judicata concerns.
- On appeal the Sixth District affirmed, holding Grimes does not apply retroactively to convictions that were final before Grimes and that the 2006 sentencing complied with the law in effect at that time.
Issues
| Issue | Madrid's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the 1,361-day judicial-sanction sentence must be vacated because the 2006 journal entry did not state the mandatory five-year postrelease-control term | The omission of the five-year term from the 2006 journal entry (per Grimes requirements) renders the postrelease-control sanction void and requires vacation of the judicial-sanction sentence | Grimes should not be applied retroactively; the 2006 oral notification plus the entry’s statutory references complied with law then, and statutes preserve the mandatory term despite journal omissions | Held for the State: Grimes does not apply retroactively to final cases; the trial court properly denied Madrid’s motion |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Grimes, 151 Ohio St.3d 19 (Ohio 2017) (sets out requirements for sentencing entries to validly impose postrelease control)
- State v. Schroeder, 151 Ohio St.3d 345 (Ohio 2017) (application of Grimes where case was pending when Grimes was announced)
- Ali v. State, 104 Ohio St.3d 328 (Ohio 2004) (new judicial rulings apply only to cases pending on announcement date; final convictions not subject to new rules)
- State v. Evans, 32 Ohio St.2d 185 (Ohio 1972) (authority on retroactivity of judicial decisions)
- State v. Perry, 10 Ohio St.2d 175 (Ohio 1967) (res judicata bars claims not raised on direct appeal)