State v. Osorio, 2017 Ohio 5837

Wilfredo Osorio was convicted after a bench trial of vehicular homicide, OVI (operating under the influence), and operating a motor vehicle without a valid license; the trial court imposed an aggregate sentence and advised of discretionary post-release control up to three years.
On appeal this Court affirmed the vehicular homicide and OVI convictions but reversed the ‘‘without a valid license’’ conviction and remanded to determine guilt on an amended failure-to-reinstate charge.
On remand Osorio pleaded guilty to failure-to-reinstate, was fined $100, and was released because he had already served the incarceration for the affirmed convictions.
Osorio then filed a post-conviction petition to vacate imposition of post-release control, arguing the trial court failed to re-notify him of post-release control at the remand hearing and that the court lacked jurisdiction to correct the error because he had completed his sentences.
The trial court denied relief, explaining the remand hearing was limited to the failure-to-reinstate count (which is not subject to post-release control) and it lacked authority to revisit or modify the affirmed sentences that had already been served.
Osorio appealed the denial; the appeals court affirmed, concluding the remand did not require re-notification of post-release control for convictions not subject to the remand.

Issue	Osorio's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court erred by denying petition to vacate post-release control for his affirmed convictions	Remand hearing was a full resentencing requiring re-notification of post-release control; reversal of one count altered original aggregate sentence so re-notification required	Remand was limited to the amended failure-to-reinstate count; post-release control had been properly imposed at the original sentencing for the affirmed convictions	Court held remand was limited; no re-notification required for convictions not before the court on remand; assignment of error overruled
Whether trial court lacked jurisdiction to impose or correct post-release control because Osorio had completed his prison terms	After completing sentence, court cannot re-impose or modify served sentences or their collateral consequences	The court cannot extend the appellate mandate and remand did not permit modification of affirmed, served sentences	Court agreed trial court could not reopen or modify the affirmed sentences on remand; therefore denial of relief was proper

Belvedere Condominium Unit Owners’ Assn. v. R.E. Roark Cos., Inc., 67 Ohio St.3d 274 (1993) (issues not raised below generally cannot be raised for first time on appeal)
Nolan v. Nolan, 11 Ohio St.3d 1 (1984) (trial court may not enlarge an appellate court’s mandate)
State v. Saxon, 109 Ohio St.3d 176 (2006) (appellate court may modify/remand only the sentence for the offense appealed; cannot alter entire multiple-offense sentence based on single-offense error)