Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
State v. Myers
Citation: 2018 Ohio 1871Docket: WD-17-063
Court: Ohio Court of Appeals; May 11, 2018; Ohio; State Appellate Court
Original Court Document: View Document
Craig R. Myers appeals the Wood County Court of Common Pleas' denial of his motion to vacate his sentence for retaliation under R.C. 2921.05(A). Myers raises four assignments of error. The first claims the trial court abused its discretion by disregarding the Legislative Intent of the Retaliation statute as outlined in House Bill 88. The second asserts that the State Prosecutor committed plain error by obtaining an indictment for retaliation before a judicial decision was made in the related case, violating his rights to a Grand Jury indictment, due process, and a fair trial under both the Ohio and U.S. Constitutions. The third assignment argues that plain error can arise from improper jury instructions. The fourth claims that the Sixth Appellate District erred in upholding his conviction, referencing a previous decision that he argues is inconsistent with a 2011 ruling. This fourth assignment is dismissed as barred by res judicata. The first three assignments are interrelated and challenge the trial court's denial of the motion to vacate. Myers filed the notice of appeal on September 29, 2017, following his conviction on February 6, 2015, and the trial court denied his motion to vacate on November 29, 2017. His subsequent motion for leave to file a delayed appeal was also denied, and he has a pending appeal with the Ohio Supreme Court. Once an appeal is filed, the trial court loses jurisdiction except for actions that aid the appeal. It retains jurisdiction only over issues that do not conflict with the appellate court’s authority to reverse, modify, or affirm the judgment in question. In this case, the trial court did not have jurisdiction to consider the appellant’s motion to vacate his sentence. If the motion had been granted, it would have obstructed the appellate court's ability to review the conviction. Citing precedent, it was determined that the trial court's actions were outside its jurisdiction, rendering the denial of the motion a nullity. Consequently, the appellate court dismissed the appeal and ordered the appellant to bear the costs. A certified copy of this decision serves as the mandate. The ruling remains subject to further editing by the Ohio Supreme Court’s Reporter of Decisions.