State v. Lawrence

Citations

• 2021 Ohio 2105

Syllabus

Motion to vacate void judgment postconviction relief R.C. 2953.21–23 abuse of discretion speedy trial violation res judicata. A motion to vacate a void judgment is treated as a petition for postconviction relief under R.C. 2953.21(A)(1) because it (1) is filed subsequent to a direct appeal, (2) claimed a denial of constitutional rights, (3) seeks to render the judgment void, and (4) asks for a vacation of the judgment and sentence. Thus, for the purposes of this appeal, we construe appellant's motion to vacate a void judgment as a petition for postconviction relief. R.C. 2953.21 through 2953.23 set forth how a convicted defendant may seek to have the trial court's judgment or sentence vacated or set aside pursuant to a petition for postconviction relief. A defendant's petition for postconviction relief is a collateral civil attack on his or her criminal conviction. The standard for appellate review of postconviction proceedings is abuse of discretion. Appellant's claim in the motion to vacate a void judgment, is undergirded by the allegation that his right to a speedy trial was violated. As such, we find his claim is barred by the doctrine of res judicata. In this matter, on June 19, 2013, while represented by counsel, appellant filed a pro se motion to dismiss for lack of a speedy trial. The trial court denied the motion, and appellant proceeded to trial where he was convicted. In his direct appeal, appellant abandoned the claimed speedy trial violation. Because appellant could have raised this claim in his direct appeal, but failed to do so, res judicata precludes him from raising his speedy trial claim. Thus, a trial court may dismiss a petition based on res judicata if an issue was or should have been raised on direct appeal. As a result, the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it denied the petition for postconviction relief, albeit styled a motion to vacate a void judgment.