Ohio Supreme Court Announces Same Postconviction-Relief Filing Deadline Applies to ‘Delayed Appeal’ as Applies to Any Other Type of Direct Appeal
by Douglas Ankney
The Supreme Court of Ohio held that the 365-day deadline set forth in R.C. 2953.21(A)(2)(a) for filing a postconviction motion begins from the date of the filing of the trial transcript in a delayed appeal.
Michael Dudas was sentenced to prison for murder and other crimes on January 20, 2021. He failed to file a timely appeal within the 30-day deadline, yet the Eighth District Court of Appeals (“COA”) granted his motion for a delayed appeal on June 15, 2021, and the trial transcript was filed in the COA on July 26, 2021. Ultimately, the COA affirmed his convictions and sentence.
Dudas filed a petition for postconviction relief on July 14, 2022. The trial court summarily denied the petition under R.C. 2953.21(D). Dudas timely appealed, arguing, inter alia, that the trial court erred in denying the petition without making the required findings of facts and conclusions of law pursuant to R.C. 2953.21(H). The COA affirmed, ruling that because the petition was untimely, the trial court was not required to make a finding of fact and conclusions of law. The Supreme Court granted Dudas’ petition for further review.
The Court observed that R.C. 2953.21(A)(2)(a) provides that a petition for postconviction relief: “shall be filed no later than three hundred sixty-five days after the date on which the trial transcript is filed in the court of appeals in the direct appeal of the judgment of conviction or adjudication.... If no appeal is taken ... the petition shall be filed no later than three hundred sixty-five days after the expiration of the time for filing the appeal.”
The COA interpreted the statute to mean that the “delayed appeal” was not a “direct appeal.” Since Dudas did not file a timely direct appeal, then the 365-day deadline began when the time for filing a timely direct appeal expired.
However, the Court disagreed, stating “App.R. 5 provides that after the expiration of the 30-day deadline for filing a notice of appeal, ‘an appeal may be taken by a defendant’ with leave of court in criminal proceedings. App.R. 5(A)(1). The rule states that if leave is granted, ‘the further procedure shall be the same as for appeals as of right in criminal cases.’ App.R. 5(F).”
“Once granted, a delayed appeal proceeds as any timely appeal would proceed, and the assertion of error is virtually the same as it would have been but for the delayed filing,” the Court explained. Quoting State v. Silsby, 894 N.E.2d 667 (Ohio 2008). In prior decisions, although not directly addressing the issue, the Supreme Court acknowledged that a delayed appeal is a form of direct appeal. See State ex rel. Rash v. Jackson, 807 N.E.2d 344 (Ohio 2004) (after the dismissal of his habeas corpus petition, the defendant “filed a delayed direct appeal from his conviction and sentence”); State v. Ishmail, 423 N.E.2d 1068 (Ohio 1981) (“No direct appeal was taken, either as a matter of right or as a delayed appeal”).
Furthermore, Ohio law uses the word “direct” to modify “appeal” simply “to distinguish challenges to a judgment of conviction that are reviewed directly through the appellate process from collateral attacks on such a judgment.” Columbus Bar Assn. v. Armengau, 158 N.E.3d 570 (Ohio 2020) (distinguishing “direct appeal” from “collateral attack”).
The Court concluded: “a delayed appeal is a direct appeal. Under a plain reading of R.C. 2953.21(A)(2)(a), the 365-day deadline from the filing of the trial transcript applies to a defendant who has been granted permission to file a direct appeal.” Thus, the Court ruled that “Dudas timely filed his postconviction petition within 365 days after the transcript was filed in the court of appeals in his delayed appeal. The Eighth Circuit erred by affirming the trial court’s judgment on the basis that Dudas’s petition was untimely.”
Accordingly, the Court reversed the judgment of the COA and remanded for the COA to consider his assignment of error. See: State v. Dudas, 234 N.E.3d 430 (Ohio 2024).
As a digital subscriber to Criminal Legal News, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.
Already a subscriber? Login
Related legal case
State v. Dudas
| Year | 2024 |
|---|---|
| Cite | 234 N.E.3d 430 (Ohio 2024) |
| Level | State Supreme Court |
