2020 Ohio 5203
Ohio Ct. App.2020Background
- Watkins pleaded guilty to first-degree trafficking in cocaine pursuant to a plea agreement; other counts/specifications were dismissed. He was sentenced Oct. 23, 2019 to a mandatory eight-year prison term and five years post-release control. The judgment noted Watkins had recently had a kidney transplant and required strict medication.
- While serving his sentence at Noble Correctional Institution, Watkins filed (Apr. 22, 2020) an "emergency" motion to withdraw his guilty plea or, alternatively, for temporary relief from judgment, citing immunosuppression, diabetes, and hypertension and a heightened COVID-19 mortality risk.
- At hearings in May and June 2020 the trial court deferred ruling on the Crim.R. 32.1 plea-withdrawal request but, citing compassion and COVID-19 risk, ordered Watkins released on a $10,000 recognizance bond with strict house arrest pending further proceedings (June 9, 2020 entry).
- The State appealed, arguing the release effectively suspended an executed mandatory prison sentence and was beyond the trial court's statutory authority.
- The Tenth District held the June 9 order was, in substance, an order of judicial release under R.C. 2929.20, but the record lacked the statutory prerequisites (including certification from DRC’s chief medical officer) that would authorize judicial release of a person serving a mandatory term; the court therefore reversed and vacated the trial court's order.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Watkins) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court lawfully released Watkins on recognizance bond/house arrest after execution of his mandatory sentence | The release functioned as a suspension/ modification of an executed sentence and exceeded the court's jurisdiction absent statutory authority | The court had authority to grant temporary relief pending the Crim.R. 32.1 motion (or under Crim.R.57/Civ.R.60/B) for humanitarian/COVID reasons | The release constituted judicial release under R.C.2929.20; trial court erred because statutory prerequisites (DRC medical certification under subsection (N)) and procedures were not satisfied |
| Whether the appeal is proper / appealable | The State may appeal a modification under R.C.2929.20 of a first-degree felony sentence (R.C.2953.08(B)(3)) | The order was not final/appealable and the appeal should be dismissed | Because the order was a judicial-release modification, the State has a statutory right to appeal; the court reviewed and reversed the release |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Lichtenwalter v. DeWine, 158 Ohio St.3d 1476 (Ohio 2020) (concurring opinion: courts have limited power over executive clemency/conditional release but should consider judicial release to mitigate COVID risks)
- State v. Hitchcock, 157 Ohio St.3d 215 (Ohio 2019) (judicial release is the sole judicial mechanism to modify an executed prison sentence)
- State v. Taylor, 113 Ohio St.3d 297 (Ohio 2007) (mandatory prison terms ordinarily preclude judicial release)
- State v. Ware, 141 Ohio St.3d 160 (Ohio 2014) (reaffirming that mandatory terms bar conventional judicial release)
- State ex rel. Cruzado v. Zaleski, 111 Ohio St.3d 353 (Ohio 2006) (trial court generally lacks authority to reconsider its valid final criminal judgments)
- Waites v. Gansheimer, 110 Ohio St.3d 250 (Ohio 2006) (habeas corpus is not the appropriate remedy to challenge conditions of confinement; civil remedies apply)
- Wilson v. Williams, 961 F.3d 829 (6th Cir. 2020) (federal appellate review of BOP COVID-19 mitigation—context on custodial relief during pandemic)
- State v. Carr, 167 Ohio App.3d 223 (Ohio Ct. App. 2006) (once offender is delivered to institution the trial court generally loses jurisdiction to modify the sentence)