State v. Ruark, 2015 Ohio 3206

In July 2008 Robert J. Ruark was indicted on multiple counts including murder, attempted murder, felonious assault, and tampering with evidence; firearm specifications were included.
A jury convicted Ruark of murder, felonious assault, and tampering with evidence; the trial court sentenced him to 31 years to life. This court affirmed on direct appeal in 2011.
Ruark filed multiple postconviction actions: a first petition in 2010 (denied; not appealed), an App.R. 26(B) reopening application in 2012 (denied), and the second postconviction petition at issue here in January 2015.
The January 2015 petition alleged newly discovered evidence and ineffective assistance related claims supported by affidavits and disciplinary decisions involving Ruark’s trial counsel.
The trial court denied the 2015 petition without an evidentiary hearing; Ruark appealed, arguing the court abused its discretion by denying relief and by failing to hold a hearing.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Ruark)	Held
Whether the trial court abused its discretion in denying Ruark's second/untimely postconviction petition as newly discovered evidence that would change the trial outcome	The petition was successive and untimely; Ruark did not establish the R.C. 2953.23(A)(1)(a) exception (unavoidably prevented from discovering facts)	Ruark asserted newly discovered evidence (affidavits and counsel disciplinary orders) showing he fired counsel before trial and counsel’s misconduct warranted relief	Court held petition was successive and untimely and Ruark failed to show he was unavoidably prevented from discovering the facts; trial court lacked jurisdiction, so denial affirmed
Whether the trial court erred by denying an evidentiary hearing on the postconviction petition	No hearing required because court lacked jurisdiction to consider the untimely/successive petition	Ruark argued the factual affidavits warranted an evidentiary hearing to resolve the claims	Court held no hearing was required where jurisdictional exceptions under R.C. 2953.23 were not satisfied; refusal to hold a hearing was not error

Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (definition of abuse of discretion)
State v. Steffen, 70 Ohio St.3d 399 (postconviction relief is collateral civil attack, not a second appeal)
State v. Perry, 10 Ohio St.2d 175 (standard for postconviction relief under Ohio law)
State v. Ishmail, 54 Ohio St.2d 402 (appellate courts may not consider evidence not part of trial-court record)
Disciplinary Counsel v. Cicero, 134 Ohio St.3d 311 (2012) (disciplinary decision referenced regarding counsel conduct)
Disciplinary Counsel v. Cicero, 143 Ohio St.3d 6 (2014) (indefinite suspension referenced regarding counsel conduct)