State v. Baker
Citations
- 2024 Ohio 4448
Syllabus
PETITION FOR POST-CONVICTION RELIEF R.C. 2953.21 R.C. 2953.23(A). The defendant-appellant's petition for post-conviction relief is untimely because it was filed many years after the 365-day deadline set forth in R.C. 2953.21. Because the defendant-appellant failed to establish that he is entitled to file a delayed petition for post-conviction relief under one of the exceptions in R.C. 2953.23(A), the trial court was without jurisdiction to consider the untimely petition.
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- “Importantly, a trial court lacks jurisdiction to entertain an untimely petition for post-conviction relief unless the petitioner demonstrates that one of the R.C. 2953.23(A) exceptions applies.”
- “Importantly, a trial court lacks jurisdiction to entertain an untimely petition for post-conviction relief unless the petitioner demonstrates that one of the R.C. 2953.23(A) exceptions applies.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Zimmerman
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCites
7 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- State v. PerryOhio Supreme Court· 1967-05-03· cited 2,571×
- State v. CalhounOhio Supreme Court· 1999-09-01· cited 1,479×
- State v. MurnahanOhio Supreme Court· 1992-02-19· cited 753×
- State v. Apanovitch (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court· 2018-11-29· cited 208×
- State v. BakerOhio Court of Appeals· 2018-08-27· cited 27×
- State v. StewartOhio Court of Appeals· 2021-07-06· cited 3×
- State v. LeeOhio Court of Appeals· 2018-09-17· cited 2×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.