The Ohio Supreme Court Modifies the Requirements for a Final Appealable Order
Today, in State v. Lester, 2011-Ohio-5204, the Ohio Supreme Court modified what constitutes a "final appealable order." Since State v. Baker, 2008-Ohio-3330, was decided by the Ohio Supreme Court, a final appealable order had to set forth the guilty plea, the jury verdict, or the finding of the court upon which the conviction is based, the sentence, the signature of the judge, and it had to be entered on the journal by the clerk of court.
Today the Ohio Supreme Court says that a final appealable order has to set forth "the fact of conviction," the sentence, the judge's signature, and the time stamp indicating the entry upon the journal by the clerk. State v. Lester, 2011-Ohio-5204.
The OSC also held that "a nunc pro tunc judgment entry issued for the sole purpose of complying with Crim.R. 32(C) to correct a clerical omission in a final judgment entry is not a new final order from which a new appeal may be taken." Id. at ΒΆ 20.
With today's decision the Ohio Supreme Court avoided an onslaught of imprisoned defendants seeking a second shot at "justice." Many sentencing entries, at least in the jurisdiction of the Second District Court of Appeals, stated a defendant "was convicted of" or "having been convicted of" instead of setting forth "the guilty plea, the jury verdict, or the finding of the court upon which the conviction is based."
Read the decision in State v. Baker, 2008-Ohio-3330, here, and the decision in State v. Lester, 2011-Ohio-5204, here.
If you are accused of a crime or have been convicted already, contact me if you can afford to hire a private criminal defense lawyer. Otherwise, contact your county or state public defender to see if they can help.
Contact me 24/7 by sending an email to ohiocriminalappealslawyer@gmail.com
