Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
8 Ohio opinions name it 2 courts 2012–2021 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Ohio courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Billitergreen2 sentences2018See, e.g., id. at ¶ 28 (Lanzinger, J., dissenting); State v. Harris, 132 Ohio St.3d 318 , 2012-Ohio-1908, ¶ 15 (holding that a sentence was void in part for failure to include a mandatory driver’s license suspension); State v. Billiter, 134 Ohio St.3d 103 , 2012-Ohio-5144, ¶ 13 (holding that res judicata did not bar a defendant from arguing that his guilty plea to a charge of escape was void due to a postrelease-control-sentencing error); State v. Moore, 135 Ohio St.3d 151 , 2012-Ohio-5479, ¶ 14 (holding that the failure to impose a mandatory fine when no affidavit of indigency had been filed 2018See, e.g., id. at ¶ 28 (Lanzinger, J., dissenting); State v. Harris, 132 Ohio St.3d 318 , 2012-Ohio-1908, ¶ 15 (holding that a sentence was void in part for failure to include a mandatory driver’s license suspension); State v. Billiter, 134 Ohio St.3d 103 , 2012-Ohio-5144, ¶ 13 (holding that res judicata did not bar a defendant from arguing that his guilty plea to a charge of escape was void due to a postrelease-control-sentencing error); State v. Moore, 135 Ohio St.3d 151 , 2012-Ohio-5479, ¶ 14 (holding that the failure to impose a mandatory fine when no affidavit of indigency had been filed | 2 | 6 |
State v. Mooregreen2 sentences2018See, e.g., id. at ¶ 28 (Lanzinger, J., dissenting); State v. Harris, 132 Ohio St.3d 318 , 2012-Ohio-1908, ¶ 15 (holding that a sentence was void in part for failure to include a mandatory driver’s license suspension); State v. Billiter, 134 Ohio St.3d 103 , 2012-Ohio-5144, ¶ 13 (holding that res judicata did not bar a defendant from arguing that his guilty plea to a charge of escape was void due to a postrelease-control-sentencing error); State v. Moore, 135 Ohio St.3d 151 , 2012-Ohio-5479, ¶ 14 (holding that the failure to impose a mandatory fine when no affidavit of indigency had been filed 2018See, e.g., id. at ¶ 28 (Lanzinger, J., dissenting); State v. Harris, 132 Ohio St.3d 318 , 2012-Ohio-1908, ¶ 15 (holding that a sentence was void in part for failure to include a mandatory driver’s license suspension); State v. Billiter, 134 Ohio St.3d 103 , 2012-Ohio-5144, ¶ 13 (holding that res judicata did not bar a defendant from arguing that his guilty plea to a charge of escape was void due to a postrelease-control-sentencing error); State v. Moore, 135 Ohio St.3d 151 , 2012-Ohio-5479, ¶ 14 (holding that the failure to impose a mandatory fine when no affidavit of indigency had been filed | 2 | 2 |
State v. Harrisgreen2 sentences2018See, e.g., id. at ¶ 28 (Lanzinger, J., dissenting); State v. Harris, 132 Ohio St.3d 318 , 2012-Ohio-1908, ¶ 15 (holding that a sentence was void in part for failure to include a mandatory driver’s license suspension); State v. Billiter, 134 Ohio St.3d 103 , 2012-Ohio-5144, ¶ 13 (holding that res judicata did not bar a defendant from arguing that his guilty plea to a charge of escape was void due to a postrelease-control-sentencing error); State v. Moore, 135 Ohio St.3d 151 , 2012-Ohio-5479, ¶ 14 (holding that the failure to impose a mandatory fine when no affidavit of indigency had been filed 2018See, e.g., id. at ¶ 28 (Lanzinger, J., dissenting); State v. Harris, 132 Ohio St.3d 318 , 2012-Ohio-1908, ¶ 15 (holding that a sentence was void in part for failure to include a mandatory driver’s license suspension); State v. Billiter, 134 Ohio St.3d 103 , 2012-Ohio-5144, ¶ 13 (holding that res judicata did not bar a defendant from arguing that his guilty plea to a charge of escape was void due to a postrelease-control-sentencing error); State v. Moore, 135 Ohio St.3d 151 , 2012-Ohio-5479, ¶ 14 (holding that the failure to impose a mandatory fine when no affidavit of indigency had been filed | 2 | 2 |
State v. Williams (Slip Opinion)green1 sentence2018See, e.g., Williams at ¶ 54 (Lanzinger, J., dissenting) (discussing the non-postrelease-control-sentencing errors that the Supreme Court has determined renders a sentence void). {¶15} A trial court’s inadvertent failure to comply with the mandate of R.C. 2951.03(A) and Crim.R. 32.2 is not a jurisdictional error. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Ohio. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Fischer
green
2 sentences2015Fischer, 128 Ohio St.3d 92 , 2010-Ohio-6238 , 942 N.E.2d 332 , paragraph one of the syllabus (“A sentence that does not include the statutorily mandated term of postrelease control is void, is not precluded from appellate review by principles of res judicata, and may be reviewed at any time, on direct appeal or by collateral attack.”); State v. Billiter, 134 Ohio St.3d 103 , 2012-Ohio-5144 , 980 N.E.2d 960 , syllabus (“When a criminal defendant is improperly sentenced to postrelease control, res judicata does not bar the defendant from collaterally attacking his conviction for escape due to an 2015Fischer, 128 Ohio St.3d 92 , 2010-Ohio-6238 , 942 N.E.2d 332 , paragraph one of the syllabus (“A sentence that does not include the statutorily mandated term of postrelease control is void, is not precluded from appellate review by principles of res judicata, and may be reviewed at any time, on direct appeal or by collateral attack.”); State v. Billiter, 134 Ohio St.3d 103 , 2012-Ohio-5144 , 980 N.E.2d 960 , syllabus (“When a criminal defendant is improperly sentenced to postrelease control, res judicata does not bar the defendant from collaterally attacking his conviction for escape due to an | 2 | 2015–2016 |
State v. Harper (Slip Opinion)
green
2 sentences2021Billiter held that “[w]hen a criminal defendant is improperly sentenced to postrelease control, res judicata does not bar the defendant from collaterally attacking his conviction for escape due to an earlier postrelease-control sentencing error.” Billiter at syllabus. {¶ 45} Significantly, both Fischer and Billiter have been overruled by State v. Harper, 160 Ohio St.3d 480 , 2020-Ohio-2913 , 159 N.E.3d 248 . 2021Billiter held that “[w]hen a criminal defendant is improperly sentenced to postrelease control, res judicata does not bar the defendant from collaterally attacking his conviction for escape due to an earlier postrelease-control sentencing error.” Billiter at syllabus. {¶ 45} Significantly, both Fischer and Billiter have been overruled by State v. Harper, 160 Ohio St.3d 480 , 2020-Ohio-2913 , 159 N.E.3d 248 . | 1 | 2021–2021 |
State v. Singleton
red
2 sentences2013State v. Singleton, 124 Ohio St.3d 173 , 2009-Ohio-6434 , 920 N.E.2d 958 , paragraph two of the syllabus; State v. Brown, 1st Dist. 2013State v. Singleton, 124 Ohio St.3d 173 , 2009-Ohio-6434 , 920 N.E.2d 958 , paragraph two of the syllabus; State v. Brown, 1st Dist. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
State v. Lynch
green
1 sentence2013The State’s reliance on Lynch, however, is misplaced, since the Ohio Supreme Court recently overruled that decision in State v.Lynch, Sup. Ct. No. 2012-1361, 2012-Ohio-5730 (Dec. 6, 2012), at ¶ 1, on the authority of State v. Billiter, 134 Ohio St.3d 103 , 2012-Ohio-5144 , 980 N.E.2d 960 . 14 {¶ 19} In Billiter, in a four-to-three decision, the Supreme Court of Ohio addressed a certified conflict between this Court and the Fifth District regarding “whether res judicata bars a criminal defendant from arguing that his plea is void due to an earlier postrelease-control sentencing error when the d | 1 | 2013–2013 |
State v. Billiter
green
2 sentences2012(No. 2011-1501—Submitted May 22, 2012—Decided November 7, 2012.) CERTIFIED by the Court of Appeals for Stark County, No. 2010C400292, 2011-Ohio-2230 . __________________ SYLLABUS OF THE COURT When a criminal defendant is improperly sentenced to postrelease control, res judicata does not bar the defendant from collaterally attacking his conviction for escape due to an earlier postrelease-control sentencing error. __________________ MCGEE BROWN, J. {¶ 1} We are asked to resolve a certified conflict between the Fifth and Second District Courts of Appeals on whether res judicata bars a criminal de 2012(No. 2011-1501—Submitted May 22, 2012—Decided November 7, 2012.) CERTIFIED by the Court of Appeals for Stark County, No. 2010C400292, 2011-Ohio-2230 . __________________ SYLLABUS OF THE COURT When a criminal defendant is improperly sentenced to postrelease control, res judicata does not bar the defendant from collaterally attacking his conviction for escape due to an earlier postrelease-control sentencing error. __________________ MCGEE BROWN, J. {¶ 1} We are asked to resolve a certified conflict between the Fifth and Second District Courts of Appeals on whether res judicata bars a criminal de | 1 | 2012–2012 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.