State v. Weaver
2013 Ohio 898
Ohio Ct. App.2013Background
- Defendant-appellant Jacob Weaver sought reconsideration of this court's prior decision in 12BE21 affirming a trial-court denial of post-judgment relief.
- The appellate court held reconsideration must be filed within ten days after mailing of judgment; the clerk noted mailing on February 6, 2013.
- Weaver claimed the reconsideration was mailed February 15, 2013, but mailing alone does not constitute timely filing unless received by the clerk; App.R. 13(A).
- Three-day addendum rule under App.R. 14(C) applies when service is by mail, extending time for filing to thirteen days after mailing.
- Under the facts, the court concluded the reconsideration was due February 19, 2013 (the text shows 2012 due to a typographical error in the opinion) and was filed February 21, 2013, thus untimely.
- Even if timely, the court found the reconsideration meritless, because reconsideration is not a vehicle to relitigate issues already decided where no obvious error is shown.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the application for reconsideration was timely filed. | Weaver argued timely due to mailing. | Weaver asserted timely filing under App.R. 13 and 14(C). | Untimely filing; 13-day period not met. |
| Whether the reconsideration presents an obvious error or overlooked issue warranting relief. | Weaver claimed an obvious error at ¶11 regarding post-plea void sentence issues. | Weaver argued the court mischaracterized Fischer and related pre-sentencing errors. | No obvious error; Fischer-based arguments misapplied to pre-sentencing issues. |
| Whether the sentence issues related to speedy-trial rights affect validity of the sentence and are cognizable via reconsideration. | Weaver asserted his speedy-trial claim invalidated the sentence. | Trial court ruling and appellate decision held speedy-trial issues do not void a conviction or sentence; waiver via guilty plea and res judicata. | Speedy-trial claims do not render a sentence unlawful; waiver and res judicata bar the claim here. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Fischer, 128 Ohio St.3d 92 (2010) (facially invalid sentence; post-release control issues cannot challenge pre-sentence errors)
- State v. Kelley, 57 Ohio St.3d 127 (1991) (guilty plea waives certain speedy-trial claims; applies to post-conviction context)