State v. Martin, 2017 Ohio 5657

In 1995 Tyrone Martin was indicted for three counts of aggravated murder, aggravated burglary, and aggravated robbery; he pled guilty to one aggravated murder and the burglary and robbery counts pursuant to a joint recommendation.
The trial court imposed a jointly recommended sentence of life with parole eligibility after 30 years on February 2, 1996.
Martin did not timely appeal; a 1997 motion for leave to file a delayed appeal was denied for failure to show a reasonable explanation for the delay.
Martin filed multiple postconviction motions years later, including a 2012 motion to withdraw his guilty plea (denied) and a 2015 petition under R.C. 2953.21 claiming the court failed to advise him of appellate rights at sentencing.
The trial court dismissed the 2015 petition as untimely under R.C. 2953.21 and concluded it lacked jurisdiction because no statutory exception to the 180‑day filing deadline was alleged.
The court of appeals affirmed, holding the untimeliness jurisdictional and that dismissal without an evidentiary hearing was proper when a petition is untimely and no exception applies.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court erred by dismissing the postconviction petition as untimely	State: Trial court properly dismissed an untimely petition when no exception to R.C. 2953.21 applied	Martin: Petition should be considered because court failed to advise him of appellate rights at sentencing, entitling him to relief	Affirmed: Petition untimely; no jurisdiction without showing an exception under R.C. 2953.23, so dismissal proper
Whether the trial court erred by not holding an evidentiary hearing	State: No hearing required where the court lacks jurisdiction over an untimely petition	Martin: Governs that a hearing is required (cites federal and state precedent)	Affirmed: No hearing required because petition was jurisdictionally barred as untimely

(No official reporter citations provided in the opinion text; none listed here.)