State v. Stayton
2017 Ohio 8615
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Andrew J. Stayton pled guilty in Erie C.P. to complicity to commit aggravated possession of drugs (first-degree felony) on March 17, 2014; sentence agreed as five years concurrent with an earlier Lorain County sentence.
- Sentenced March 19, 2014, to five years at Lorain Correctional Institution with seven days jail-time credit awarded by Erie County court.
- Stayton claimed he was continuously confined from February 23, 2013 until March 17, 2014 (in Lorain County custody or serving a Lorain sentence) and sought additional jail-time credit for the period after his Erie indictment because he did not post bail.
- He relied on State v. Fugate to argue R.C. 2967.191 entitles him to credit for all time held on charges underlying his Erie sentence, even if held on other jurisdictions’ custody or serving another sentence.
- Erie County denied his motions to recalculate jail-time credit; Stayton filed a delayed appeal from the denial of his renewed motion.
- The Sixth District affirmed, holding Stayton’s claim was a substantive legal challenge that should have been raised on direct appeal and is barred by res judicata.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Stayton is entitled to additional jail-time credit for time held in another county/facility while awaiting Erie charges or serving another sentence | Stayton: Under Fugate, R.C. 2967.191 requires credit for all time held on charges; he did not post bail so credit should apply from Aug 23, 2013 to Mar 29, 2014 | State/Erie County: The claim is a substantive legal challenge about credit application that must be raised on direct appeal; not a clerical correction | Court held the claim is substantive, barred by res judicata for failure to raise on direct appeal; affirmed denial of recalculation |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Fugate, 883 N.E.2d 440 (Ohio 2008) (R.C. 2967.191 requires jail-time credit be applied to all prison terms imposed for charges on which offender was held; court cannot pick among concurrent terms)
- State v. Perry, 226 N.E.2d 104 (Ohio 1967) (doctrine of res judicata bars raising claims that were or could have been raised on direct appeal)