State v. Jackson

Citations

• 2020 Ohio 4115

Syllabus

Judgment affirmed. Pro se defendant did not demonstrate that he was entitled to de novo resentencing where new legislative enactment Senate Bill 231 required him to register for violent offender database for ten years upon release. Defendant's challenges to the law under Ex Post Facto Clause of the United States Constitution and Art. II Sec. 28 of the Ohio Constitution, Article II, Section 28 were not ripe for review, as defendant was incarcerated with no current expectation of release. De novo resentencing was not an available remedy, because appropriate remedy, if any, would be to sever the unconstitutionally-imposed sanction and reinstate original sentence.