State v. Vanover, 2015 Ohio 345

Quill Vanover was originally indicted in 2003 on multiple counts; he pleaded guilty to bribery and intimidation but an appellate reversal found the intimidation plea/indictment defective for failing to allege "knowingly."
A new indictment was filed August 1, 2005 (adding the required mens rea); Vanover pleaded guilty to kidnapping, bribery, and intimidation and was sentenced to 23 years. Appeals and a Foster remand followed; resentencing again produced a 23-year term which was affirmed.
Vanover filed a petition for post-conviction relief on May 19, 2014. The State moved to dismiss as untimely and the trial court dismissed the petition as untimely.
Vanover appealed, raising claims that the State impermissibly amended/reauthorized the indictment outside applicable time limits (Crim.R. 7(D) / R.C. limitations), that his convictions/sentences were void, ineffective assistance for failure to raise voidness, and various constitutional challenges and requests for retroactive application of Johnson.
The appellate court reviewed timeliness, indictment sufficiency, ineffective-assistance claims, challenges to R.C. 2953.23, and whether Johnson (and related doctrines) applied retroactively to his final conviction.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the State impermissibly amended the indictment outside allowable time	State: indictment/re‑filing was timely and lawful	Vanover: re‑indictment was untimely and amounted to an illegal amendment rendering convictions void	Held: No amendment occurred; a new indictment was filed within statutory time limits and was proper; indictment valid
Whether the indictment remained defective for failing to allege mens rea for intimidation	State: the new indictment included proper mens rea	Vanover: indictment was still deficient for intimidation of a witness	Held: New indictment alleged the required mens rea; no defect
Whether trial counsel was ineffective for not asserting convictions were void	State: counsel not ineffective because convictions are not void	Vanover: counsel should have argued voidness	Held: No ineffective assistance because voidness claim lacks merit
Whether subsequent judicial changes (Johnson) or constitutional challenges permit relief after conviction finality	State: new rules (Johnson) do not apply retroactively to final convictions; statute R.C. 2953.23 is constitutional	Vanover: Johnson and doctrines require retrospective application or render 2953.23 unconstitutional as applied	Held: Johnson cannot be applied retroactively to a conviction final before Johnson; R.C. 2953.23 constitutional as applied

State v. Foster, 845 N.E.2d 470 (Ohio 2006) (sentencing guidance requiring remand for judicial factfinding changes)
Lingo v. State, 7 N.E.3d 1188 (Ohio 2014) (trial court has inherent authority to vacate void judgments; void judgments open to collateral attack at any time)
State v. Johnson, 942 N.E.2d 1061 (Ohio 2010) (new analysis for allied-offense/merger under R.C. 2941.25)
State ex rel. Dickman v. Defenbacher, 128 N.E.2d 59 (Ohio 1955) (statutes are presumed constitutional)