State v. Moncrief
2017 Ohio 722
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Christopher T. Moncrief sought permission to submit polygraph results to support a future motion to withdraw his guilty plea or a postconviction petition.
- The Franklin County Court of Common Pleas entered an April 27, 2016 entry declining to admit the polygraph evidence for that purpose.
- Moncrief filed a notice of appeal attempting to challenge that April 27, 2016 entry.
- The trial court had previously addressed Moncrief’s repeated collateral challenges to his guilty plea in multiple prior appeals.
- The Court of Appeals reviewed whether the order was a final, appealable order and whether Moncrief’s appeal was timely.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court's refusal to admit polygraph results for use in a future postconviction motion is a final, appealable order | State: The entry is not a final appealable order because it anticipatorily rules on evidence for a potential future motion | Moncrief: The order should be appealable now to vindicate his right to use the polygraph to support relief | Court: The order is not final and therefore not appealable now |
| Whether Moncrief timely filed a notice of appeal from the April 27, 2016 entry | State: Even if appealable, the notice was filed outside the 30-day window and is untimely | Moncrief: (implicitly) attempted to serve/submit notice in mid-May and should be treated as timely | Court: The appeal was filed more than 30 days after the entry and is jurisdictionally untimely; appeal dismissed |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Leis v. Kraft, 10 Ohio St.3d 34 (1984) (order granting polygraph at state expense was treated as final and appealable by the state)
- VFW Post 1238 v. Ohio Liquor Control Comm., 78 Ohio St.3d 1482 (1997) (timeliness of notice of appeal under App.R. 4 is jurisdictional and may be considered sua sponte)