2019 Ohio 2048
Ohio Ct. App.2019Background
- Dante A. Myers was sentenced in 2007 in two Lucas County Common Pleas cases that imposed postrelease control; he did not appeal those convictions or sentences.
- The sentencing entries referenced postrelease-control statutes but did not specify whether control was mandatory, its duration, or that the Adult Parole Authority (APA) would administer it.
- Myers was released after serving his prison terms and later moved (in 2017) to vacate the postrelease-control sanction, conceding he was orally told about postrelease control at sentencing but asserting the entries were void under State v. Grimes.
- The trial court agreed the entries lacked Grimes-required language but entered nunc pro tunc corrections under Crim.R. 36 and R.C. 2929.191, relying on Sixth District precedent (e.g., State v. Murray) to avoid resentencing.
- The Sixth District court affirmed, holding Grimes is a new rule not to be applied retroactively to cases final before Grimes was announced, and certified a conflict with the Tenth District for Supreme Court resolution.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether sentencing entries lacking Grimes detail rendered postrelease control void and entitled Myers to vacatur without nunc pro tunc correction | Myers: entries are void under Grimes because they failed to state mandatory vs. discretionary, term length, and APA administration; vacatur is required | State: Grimes is a new rule and not retroactive to final cases; trial court may correct clerical omission via nunc pro tunc/Crim.R. 36 without resentencing | Court: Affirmed state; Grimes not applied retroactively to finalized 2007 sentences, nunc pro tunc correction was permissible per Sixth District precedent |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Grimes, 151 Ohio St.3d 19 (2017) (sentencing entry must state whether postrelease control is mandatory or discretionary, its duration, and that APA will administer and may sanction under R.C. 2967.28)
- State v. Qualls, 131 Ohio St.3d 499 (2012) (postrelease-control notification requirements and consequences of defective notices)
- Watkins v. Collins, 111 Ohio St.3d 425 (2006) (postrelease-control entry evaluated under substantial-compliance standard existing at that time)
- State v. Sarkozy, 117 Ohio St.3d 86 (2008) (interpretation of postrelease-control notice standards under Watkins)
- State v. Lonero, 151 Ohio St.3d 277 (2017) (applying Grimes on cases pending on direct appeal when Grimes was announced)