State v. Bryan

Citations

• 2018 Ohio 1190

Syllabus

Death penalty motion for leave motion for a new mitigation trial Hurst untimely Crim.R. 33 postconviction independently legally correct App.R. 12(A)(1)(c). In a death penalty case, trial court's denial of defendant's Crim.R. 33 motion for leave to file a motion for a new mitigation trial, which was premised on Hurst v. Florida, 577 U.S. __, 136 S.Ct. 616, 193 L.Ed.2d 504 (2016), was upheld because the motion for leave was untimely. Although the trial court incorrectly determined the motion should have been filed under R.C. 2953.23, when Crim.R. 33 procedures for a new trial exist independently from the procedure for postconviction relief, an appellate court may affirm the decision of the trial court as long as it is legally correct on other grounds.