2019 Ohio 3227
Ohio Ct. App.2019Background
- Lonnie Rarden was convicted after a 2006 jury trial of several felonies (including escape, complicity to perjury, and complicity to tampering with evidence) and sentenced to 26.5 years; convictions were affirmed on direct appeal.
- Rarden filed numerous postconviction and collateral challenges over the years; multiple appeals followed.
- In March–November 2018 Rarden filed motions in two Butler County case numbers requesting correction of allegedly illegal or void sentences; the trial court denied those motions as barred by res judicata on November 28, 2018.
- While an appeal of that denial was pending, the trial court on February 13, 2019 issued a nunc pro tunc entry correcting a clerical error in the November 28, 2018 entry (clarifying which motion was overruled).
- Rarden appealed the nunc pro tunc entry, arguing the trial court lacked jurisdiction to issue it while an appeal was pending; the appellate court concluded it lacked jurisdiction to hear the appeal because the nunc pro tunc order was not a new final appealable order and dismissed the appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court lacked jurisdiction to issue a nunc pro tunc entry while an appeal was pending | Rarden: trial court lost jurisdiction once appeal was filed, so the nunc pro tunc is void and appealable | State: the nunc pro tunc merely corrected a clerical error and did not create a new final order; no new appealable order was formed | Court: nunc pro tunc corrected a clerical error, is retrospective, not a new final order; appellate court lacks jurisdiction, appeal dismissed |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Lester, 130 Ohio St.3d 303 (2011) (nunc pro tunc entries correct the record to reflect what the court actually decided)
- State v. Miller, 127 Ohio St.3d 407 (2010) (nunc pro tunc entries reflect the court's actual action, not intended or prospective changes)
- State v. Qualls, 131 Ohio St.3d 499 (2012) (nunc pro tunc applies retrospectively and does not create a new final order for appeal)
- State v. Bonner, 2015-Ohio-1010 (10th Dist.) (dismissal for lack of final appealable order where nunc pro tunc did not create a new final order)