State v. Roberts

Citations

• 2017 Ohio 1060

Syllabus

APPELLATE REVIEW - JURISDICTION - POSTCONVICTION - POSTRELEASE CONTROL: Defendant's judgment of conviction was not correctable under Crim.R. 36 on the grounds that his sentence was not imposed in conformity with the statutes governing repeat violent offenders, indefinite sentences, jail-time credit, and postrelease control, because those claims alleged errors of law, not fact. Defendant's postconviction motion seeking relief on the grounds that his sentence was not imposed in conformity with the statutes governing repeat violent offenders, indefinite sentences, jail-time credit, and postrelease control was not reviewable by the common pleas court under R.C. 2953.21 et seq. as a postconviction petition, because it did not allege a constitutional violation under Crim.R. 33 as a motion for a new trial or under Crim.R. 32.1 as a motion to withdraw guilty pleas, because he was convicted following a jury trial and did not seek a new trial under R.C. Chapter 2731 as a petition for a writ of mandamus, under R.C. Chapter 2721 as a declaratory judgment action, or under R.C. Chapter 2725 as a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, because the motion did not satisfy those statutes' procedural requirements or under Civ.R. 60(B), upon the authority of Crim.R. 57(B), because his conviction was reviewable under the procedures provided for a direct appeal. Defendant's judgment of conviction was not correctable under a court's jurisdiction to correct a void judgment on the grounds that his sentence was not imposed in conformity with the statutes governing repeat violent offenders, indefinite sentences, or jail-time credit but his sentence was subject to correction as void to the extent that it did not conform with the statutory mandates concerning postrelease control, because the mandatory five-year period imposed was not authorized for the special felony of murder.