State v. McDonald, Unpublished Decision (5-19-2003)
State v. McDonald, Unpublished Decision (5-19-2003)
Opinion of the Court
OPINION
{¶ 1} Appellant Charles J. McDonald appeals the denial of his "Motion to Correct Illegal Sentence" in the Stark County Court of Common Pleas. The relevant facts leading to this appeal are as follows.{¶ 2} On January 30, 1998, the Stark County Grand Jury indicted appellant on one count of rape in violation of R.C.
{¶ 3} A jury trial commenced on January 4, 1999. The jury found appellant guilty of the rape charge. The trial court also found appellant guilty of the specification. In a judgment entry filed January 14, 1999, the trial court sentenced appellant to an indefinite term of ten to seventy-five years in prison, and classified him a sexually violent predator. Appellant appealed therefrom, raising five Assignments of Error. See State v. McDonald (Feb. 14, 2000), Stark App. No. 1999CA00019. This Court affirmed the decision of the trial court. Id.
{¶ 4} On December 2, 2002, appellant filed a "Motion to Correct Illegal Sentence," alleging that his sentence should have been a definite term of three to ten years under the provisions of Senate Bill 2. On December 16, 2002, the trial court denied the motion, finding the sexually violent predator specification permitted the indefinite sentence per R.C.
{¶ 5} Appellant timely appealed and herein raises the following sole Assignment of Error:
{¶ 6} "I. A court abuses its discretion when it refuses to apply the correct state of the law violating the
{¶ 8} Appellant's motion to the trial court failed to designate any jurisdictional authority under which appellant could file his self-styled petition. Assuming, arguendo, appellant intended the motion to be a petition for postconviction relief, it was not timely filed. R.C.
{¶ 9} Nonetheless, the statutory requirements of post-conviction relief notwithstanding, appellant failed to present his present argument, which raises no issues dehors the record, in his 1999 appeal. Res judicata will be applied to bar the further litigation of issues that were either raised or could have been raised through a prior appeal. SeeState v. Dimitrov, Cuyahoga App. No. 76986, 2002-Ohio-2350, citing Statev. Perry (1967),
{¶ 10} "(A) Notwithstanding divisions (A), (B), (C), and (F) of section
"* * *
{¶ 11} "(3) Except as otherwise provided in division (A)(4) of this section, if the offense is an offense other than aggravated murder, murder, or an offense for which a term of life imprisonment may be imposed, it shall impose an indefinite prison term consisting of a minimum term fixed by the court from among the range of terms available as a definite term for the offense, but not less than two years, and a maximum term of life imprisonment."
{¶ 12} Accordingly, appellant's sole Assignment of Error is overruled.
{¶ 13} For the reasons stated in the foregoing opinion, the judgment of the Court of Common Pleas, Stark County, Ohio, is hereby affirmed.
By: Wise, J. Gwin, P.J., and Boggins, J., concur.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.