State v. Taylor, 2019 Ohio 1376

In Dec. 2007 Taylor shot and killed Jerod Bryson; jury convicted him of multiple counts including murder, felonious assault, and discharging a firearm on or near prohibited premises.
Trial court sentenced Taylor to an aggregate 41 years to life; convictions and some merger rulings were addressed at trial.
Taylor appealed; this is his fourth appeal. Direct appeals (Taylor I and II) affirmed convictions; a later challenge to his sentence under Eighth Amendment principles (Taylor III) was rejected.
While an appeal (Taylor III) of a postconviction Eighth Amendment/sentence challenge was pending, Taylor filed a pro se motion in the trial court to merge (correct) allied offenses (discharge of firearm with murder or felonious assault).
The trial court denied the allied-offenses motion for lack of jurisdiction because the appellate court had jurisdiction while Taylor III was pending; Taylor appealed that denial.
The appellate court affirmed: it held the trial court properly declined jurisdiction during the pending appeal and further found Taylor’s merger claim barred by res judicata.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court had jurisdiction to hear Taylor's motion to correct allied offenses while an appeal (Taylor III) of his sentence was pending	State: Trial court was divested of jurisdiction by the pending appeal; ruling on merger would interfere with appellate jurisdiction	Taylor: Pending appeal concerned Eighth Amendment juvenile-sentencing issues, not allied-offense merger, so trial court retained jurisdiction	Court: Trial court correctly declined jurisdiction because ruling on merger would conflict with the appellate court’s ability to review/modifiy the sentence during the pending appeal
Whether Count 6 (discharging firearm on/near prohibited premises) should be merged with murder or felonious assault (double-jeopardy/void sentence)	State: Merger argument is barred by res judicata because allied-offense claims must be raised on direct appeal; failure to merge makes a sentence voidable, not void	Taylor: Trial court erred by failing to merge these offenses; he can raise merger now and seeks plain-error review	Court: Merger challenge is barred by res judicata (could have been raised on direct appeal); assignment overruled

State ex rel. Special Prosecutors v. Judges, Court of Common Pleas, 55 Ohio St.2d 94 (trial court is divested of jurisdiction after appeal is filed except for matters in aid of the appeal)
State v. Moore, 149 Ohio St.3d 557 (Ohio 2016) (juvenile-sentencing Eighth Amendment principles affecting resentencing)
Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (U.S. 2012) (categorical Eighth Amendment rule for mandatory life without parole for juveniles)
Grava v. Parkman Twp., 73 Ohio St.3d 379 (res judicata bars subsequent actions arising from same transaction)
State v. Perry, 10 Ohio St.2d 175 (res judicata principle applies to issues that were or could have been raised on direct appeal)