State v. S.A.A.

Summary

The Tenth District Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of S.A.A.'s postconviction petition challenging his sentence. The court held that the petition, filed years after the statutory deadline, was untimely and that S.A.A. failed to establish any exception under R.C. 2953.23 that would confer jurisdiction. The court overruled all six assignments of error.

Holdings

1. Because the appeal arose from the dismissal of a motion challenging sentencing that the trial court construed as a postconviction petition, the six sentencing assignments of error were collectively treated as challenging dismissal of the postconviction petition.
2. A petition for postconviction relief filed more than 365 days after the date on which the trial transcript was filed in the direct appeal is untimely unless an exception in R.C. 2953.23(A) applies.
3. The trial court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the untimely postconviction petition because the appellant failed to establish any applicable exception under R.C. 2953.23(A).

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court properly dismissed S.A.A.'s September 17, 2025 petition for postconviction relief as untimely and beyond its jurisdiction.
2. Whether any statutory exception under R.C. 2953.23(A) permitted the trial court to consider the untimely petition.
3. Whether the appellant's six assignments of error concerning his sentence had merit.

Disposition

affirmed