State v. Painter, 2013 Ohio 529

Defendant Aaron Painter was convicted on multiple drug-trafficking and possession counts after undercover narcotics sales and a home search; the charges were split by dosage and some counts were aligned with a juvenile vicinity allegation.
Painter pled guilty to seven trafficking and two possession counts; the state nolleled remaining counts and the juvenile- vicinity specification.
In 2009 Painter received a 108-month prison sentence, suspended, with placement on community control; no direct appeal was filed.
In 2010 Painter violated community control; the court revoked it and ordered execution of the suspended sentence but failed to advise Painter of appellate rights at the revocation hearing.
Painter later sought a delayed appeal in 2012, which this court granted limited to the August 4, 2010 revocation entry; the court treated the matter as an appeal of the revocation, not of the 2009 sentence.
The appellate court ultimately held it lacked jurisdiction to review the 2009 sentencing entry and affirmed the 2010 revocation decision.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether challenges to the 2009 sentence are properly reviewable	Painter (State) argued review of the 2009 sentence via the delayed appeal.	Painter urged reviewing the 2009 sentence in light of the 2010 revocation.	Limited to the 2010 revocation entry; 2009 sentence review denied for lack of jurisdiction.
Whether the revocation of community control was supported by the record	State contends there was ample evidence of violations.	Painter contends the revocation was improper or unsupported.	No abuse of discretion; substantial evidence supported revocation.
Whether the failure to advise of appellate rights at revocation was reversible error	State argues any error is harmless given delayed appeal granted.	Painter argues the advisory error affected his rights.	Harmless error; delayed appeal granted and review limited to revocation entry.

State v. Rogers, 2007-Ohio-7076 (12th Dist. No. CA2007-05-068) (review of revocation limited; direct-appeal timing governs)
State v. Dodson, 2011-Ohio-6347 (12th Dist. No. CA2011-02-034) (time to challenge allied offenses conviction via direct appeal)
State v. Inman, 2011-Ohio-3438 (4th Dist. No. 10CA3176) (delayed appeal renders collateral issues moot)
State v. Sturgill, 2012-Ohio-4102 (12th Dist. No. CA2011-08-166) (revocation of community control reviewed for abuse of discretion)
State v. Simpson, 2002-Ohio-1909 (12th Dist. No. CA2000-12-251) (revocation findings require substantial evidence; abuse of discretion)