Youngstown Daily Legal News

Man who pleaded to manslaughter wins appeal for original sentence

ANNIE YAMSON
Special to the Legal News
Published: February 24, 2016

A Franklin County Court of Common Pleas judgment was found to be null and void by a court of appeals this week.

A three-judge panel in the 10th District Court of Appeals ruled that the lower court erred when it denied a motion to vacate a void judgment from Robert Oliver.

At issue in the case was whether a trial court has the authority to revisit and modify its own final judgment.

Case summary states that by an indictment filed on March 10, 2014, Oliver was charged with the murder and aggravated robbery of Zane Wilson.

Later that year, a plea agreement was reached under which the state allowed Oliver to plead guilty to the lesser-included offense of involuntary manslaughter and aggravated robbery in exchange for a 17-year prison sentence.

As part of the deal, Oliver agreed to cooperate with authorities and testify fully and truthfully in any proceedings concerning the crimes against Wilson.

The agreement specifically stated that if Oliver failed to cooperate with the terms of the deal, “the parties shall be returned to the positions they were in before this agreement” and Oliver “waives any argument he may have concerning double jeopardy.”

In October 2004 the trial court accepted Oliver’s guilty plea and imposed the agreed-upon 17-year sentence.

The decision was journalized in an Oct. 29 judgment entry and Oliver did not appeal.

According to court documents, nearly 11 months after the trial court’s original sentencing, the state filed a motion to void Oliver’s plea agreement.

It argued that Oliver failed to abide by the terms of the deal by not testifying truthfully in the prosecution of Jason Hayes, who was also tried for Wilson’s death.

In 2006, the Franklin County court granted the state’s motion to void the plea agreement. It subsequently “reactivated” the case and set the matter for a new trial.

A second plea agreement was reached, though this one did not contain a jointly recommended sentence resulting in a new, 23-year prison term for Oliver according to a judgment entry filed on March 3, 2016.

More than eight years after that sentence Oliver filed a motion for resentencing to vacate a void judgment.

He argued that the Ohio Supreme Court’s decision in State v. Gilbert (2014-Ohio-4562) resulted in a lack of subject matter jurisdiction for the trial court when it vacated his original plea and resentenced him.

The trial court denied Oliver’s motion but, upon review, the 10th District court found that the lower court abused its discretion, upholding Oliver’s argument that State v. Gilbert was controlling in this case.

In Gilbert, the state’s high court held, “Once a defendant has been sentenced by a trial court, that court does not have jurisdiction to entertain a motion by the state to vacate the defendant’s guilty plea and sentence based upon the defendant’s alleged violation of a plea agreement.”

“The facts in Gilbert are almost identical to the facts here,” Judge Betsy Luper Schuster wrote in the opinion she authored on behalf of the court of appeals.

Citing the Supreme Court once again, Luper Schuster wrote that a final judgment in a criminal case sets forth the fact of the conviction, the sentence, the judge’s signature and the time stamp indicating that the judgment was journalized.

“Once a final judgment has been issued, pursuant to Crim.R. 32, the trial court’s jurisdiction ends,” the Supreme Court wrote, noting that the contract principles of plea agreements “are not so flexible to permit jurisdiction to be maintained in perpetuity to enforce such agreements.”

Ultimately, the high court ruled that if the trial court is concerned with a defendant abiding by the terms of a plea agreement, the solution would be to postpone sentencing until after the defendant has performed the desired act.

“We agree with Oliver that Gilbert is directly applicable to this case,” Luper Schuster wrote, “and based on Gilbert, we conclude the trial court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the state’s post-sentence motion to vacate Oliver’s guilty plea and sentenced based on his alleged violation of the plea agreement.”

The reviewing court concluded that the Franklin County court’s 2004 judgment entry was a final judgment and ended the court’s jurisdiction in the matter.

“Thus, the trial court’s March 3, 2006 judgment entry purporting to resentence Oliver under the new plea agreement was a nullity and void ab initio and the trial court erred in denying Oliver’s motion to vacate a void judgment,” Luper Schuster concluded.

The case was remanded with instructions to the lower court to grant Oliver’s motion and reinstate his original 17-year sentence.

Presiding Judge Julia Dorrian and Judge Timothy Horton joined Luper Schuster to form the majority.

The case is cited State v. Oliver, 2016-Ohio-475.

[Back]