State v. Walker
2017 Ohio 7609
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- In 2010 Walker received multiple sentences: a 3-year prison term in CR-10-536783-A, a 2-year community-control term in the burglary case (CR-09-526641-B) expressly ordered to begin after completion of the 3-year prison term, and a 2-year community-control term in the weapon case (CR-09-526893-A) that made no express reference to consecutive service.
- The trial court’s journal entry for the burglary case expressly stated the community control must be completed after the prison term; the weapon-case entry did not state consecutive service, only that the same conditions applied.
- Walker violated community control in 2014; the court terminated community control and imposed prison sentences aggregating five years (3 years for burglary, 2 years for the weapon case). Walker had counsel at the violation hearings.
- After this court’s en banc Anderson decision (holding courts lack statutory authority to impose community control consecutive to a prison term and such sentences are void), Walker moved pro se to vacate his 2010 community-control sentences as void ab initio.
- The trial court denied the motions; this accelerated appeal followed. The court here examined whether (a) community control may be imposed to run consecutive to a prison term, and (b) whether the weapon-case sanction tolled during prison service.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial courts have authority to impose community control to be served consecutive to a prison term | State: the sanction tolls while defendant is confined under R.C. 2929.15(A)(1) so consecutive timing is effectively preserved | Walker: courts lack statutory authority to impose community control consecutive to a prison term; such orders are void | Court: No authority to impose consecutive community control; such sentences are void ab initio (Anderson applied) |
| Whether community control in the weapon case tolled during Walker’s prison term | State: R.C. 2929.15(A)(1) tolls community control while confined, so the weapon sanction remained pending until release | Walker: R.C. 2929.15(A)(1) applies only when offender is confined while already serving community control (i.e., it tolls implementation only if community control already commenced) | Court: R.C. 2929.15(A)(1) does not apply here; weapon-case sanctions expired in 2012 and could not be violated in 2014 |
| Whether res judicata or failure to appeal bars collateral attack of an allegedly void sentence | State: defendant’s failure to timely appeal should bar relief | Walker: void sentences are not subject to res judicata and may be attacked at any time | Court: Res judicata does not apply to void judgments; collateral attack is permitted |
| Remedy when one community-control sentence is void but related convictions have been served | State: remand for resentencing or affirm | Walker: vacate unlawful imprisonment and release if sentence already served | Court: Vacated the weapon-case violation and voided its 2-year prison term; because Walker already served the burglary-term prison sentence, court ordered immediate release from the burglary sentence rather than pointless resentencing |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Anderson, 143 Ohio St.3d 173 (Ohio 2015) (trial courts lack authority to impose community control to run consecutive to prison; sentence must be authorized by statute)
- State v. Williams, 148 Ohio St.3d 403 (Ohio 2016) (void sentences are not insulated by res judicata and may be attacked at any time)
- State v. Fischer, 128 Ohio St.3d 92 (Ohio 2010) (courts must apply sentencing statutes as written; no inherent authority to craft unauthorized sentences)
- Woods v. Telb, 89 Ohio St.3d 504 (Ohio 2000) (principle that the sentence pronounced is the sentence served; truth-in-sentencing rationale)