Ohio Rev. Code » Chapter 2953
Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 2953.13 (2026)

Reversal of conviction

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORCcodes.ohio.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Effective:
April 7, 2009
Latest Legislation:
House Bill 130 - 127th General Assembly
PDF:
Download Authenticated PDF
 

When a defendant has been committed to a state correctional institution and the judgment by virtue of which the commitment was made is reversed on appeal, and the defendant is entitled to discharge or a new trial, or when the case is remanded to the trial court for any reason, the clerk of the court reversing the judgment or remanding the case, under the seal of the court, shall forthwith certify the reversal or remand to the warden of the state correctional institution.

The warden, on receipt of the certificate, if a discharge of the defendant is ordered, shall forthwith discharge the defendant from the state correctional institution.

If a new trial is ordered or the case is remanded, the warden shall forthwith cause the defendant to be conveyed to the jail of the county in which the defendant was convicted, and committed to the custody of the sheriff of that county.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1966–2025 · leading case: State ex rel. Peoples v. O'Shaughnessy (Slip Opinion), 2021 Ohio 1572 (Ohio 2021).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State ex rel. Peoples v. O'Shaughnessy (Slip Opinion), 2021 Ohio 1572 (Ohio 2021). · cites it 4× “] Mandamus—R.C. 2953.13—There is no justification for granting a writ of mandamus to compel an inmate’s transfer to county jail when the trial court is ordered to issue an amended judgment entry on remand to correct a sentencing error and there will be no resentencing…”
State ex rel. Briscoe v. Matia, 2011 Ohio 760 (Ohio 2011). “{¶ 4} When Briscoe was not transferred to the Cuyahoga County sheriff for a new trial, he filed a petition in the court of appeals for a writ of mandamus to compel appellees to transfer him pursuant to R.C. 2953.13, which directs: {¶ 5} “If a new trial is ordered or the case is…”
State Ex Rel. Smith v. Tate, 601 N.E.2d 544 (Ohio Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 3× “For the following reasons, this court denies the writ for habeas corpus, but grants the writ of mandamus and orders the warden to cause Smith to be conveyed to the Cuyahoga County jail and committed to the custody of the sheriff, pursuant to R.C. 2953.13. Between January 1988…”
State v. Hartman, 2014 Ohio 2226 (Ohio Ct. App. 2014). “HARTMAN HAD BEEN UNLAWFULLY IMPRISONED BY THE STATE OF OHIO AT THE RICHLAND CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION WITHOUT DUE PROCESS OF LAW, CONTRARY TO R.C. 2953.13 AND R.C 2905.01(B)(2), FOR A PERIOD OF THIRTY DAYS AFTER HIS CONVICTION HAD BEEN REVERSED AND REMANDED, THUS DEPRIVING MR.”
State v. Aspell, 214 N.E.2d 834 (Ohio Ct. App. 1966). · cites it 2× “See Section 2953.13, Eevised Code. It is apparent that such an order renders any suspension of sentence, and release on bail, meaningless.”
Brown v. State, 2025 Ohio 998 (Ohio Ct. App. 2025). “{¶ 9} Brown further argued that R.C. 2953.13, entitled “Reversal of Conviction” provides instructions for when “a defendant has been committed to a state correctional institution and the judgment by virtue of which the commitment was made is reversed on appeal[.”
Midgett v. Sheldon, 2021 Ohio 3096 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 2× “Midgett’s direct appeal, ODRC could no longer hold him under R.C. 2953.13. (Motion to Dismiss, p. 1) This statute provides, in pertinent part: Richland County, Case No.”
State ex rel. Jackson v. Sutula, 2011 Ohio 6086 (Ohio Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 3× “Sutula and the warden of the Mansfield Correctional Institution, Terry Tibbals, to convey him to the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas pursuant to R.C. 2953.13 and the appellate judgment as rendered by this court in State v.”
Sutton v. State, 2024 Ohio 5911 (Ohio Ct. App. 2024). “13, the statute setting out the procedure used when a conviction is reversed or remanded to the trial court by a court of review, a warden of a State correctional institution must “cause the defendant to be conveyed to the jail of the county in which the defendant was convicted,…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.