State v. Rogers
2021 Ohio 2575
Ohio Ct. App.2021Background
- Kevin Rogers was convicted in 2000 of murder, felonious assault, and aggravated robbery following a jury trial.
- Rogers filed multiple postconviction challenges (2017, 2018, 2020) and a 2020 "Motion for Relief from Judgment" alleging ineffective assistance of appellate counsel.
- His 2020 motion claimed appellate counsel failed to meet with him and failed to raise jurisdictional, arrest legality, indictment defects, and trial-counsel-ineffectiveness issues on direct appeal.
- The common pleas court overruled the 2020 motion; Rogers appealed that denial to the First District Court of Appeals.
- The appellate court concluded the common pleas court lacked jurisdiction to entertain an ineffective-appellate-counsel claim (the proper vehicle is App.R. 26(B) or a petition to the Ohio Supreme Court), the judgment was not void, and the appeals court therefore lacked jurisdiction to review the denial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the common pleas court had jurisdiction to hear a motion alleging ineffective assistance of appellate counsel | The motion was not a proper postconviction petition and did not invoke a statute conferring jurisdiction | Rogers sought relief from his convictions for appellate-counsel ineffectiveness via a motion for relief from judgment | Court: No jurisdiction; such claims belong in App.R. 26(B) or an Ohio Supreme Court petition (Murnahan) |
| Whether this court has jurisdiction to review the common pleas court's denial of the motion | Appeals court only reviews convictions or orders authorized by postconviction statutes | Rogers treated the denial as appealable final order and sought review | Court: No jurisdiction to review denial because the trial court lacked postconviction jurisdiction and R.C. provisions for appealability do not apply |
| Whether the common pleas court could grant relief by treating the conviction as void | A court may always correct a truly void judgment | Rogers argued appellate-counsel error rendered the conviction void and subject to correction | Court: Judgment was voidable, not void; trial court had personal and subject-matter jurisdiction, so void-correction power did not apply (Harper; Cruzado) |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Murnahan, 63 Ohio St.3d 60, 584 N.E.2d 1204 (1992) (claims of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel must be raised by App.R. 26(B) or to the Ohio Supreme Court)
- State v. Schlee, 117 Ohio St.3d 153, 882 N.E.2d 431 (2008) (trial courts may recast pro se motions to identify applicable procedural vehicle)
- State ex rel. Cruzado v. Zaleski, 111 Ohio St.3d 353, 856 N.E.2d 263 (2006) (a court always has jurisdiction to correct a void judgment)
- State v. Harper, 160 Ohio St.3d 480, 159 N.E.3d 248 (2020) (distinguishes void from voidable judgments; convictions are voidable if entered by a court with personal and subject-matter jurisdiction)