Summary
This Ohio Court of Appeals opinion affirms the Canton Municipal Court's denial of a defendant's motion to vacate his disorderly conduct conviction. The defendant argued that the underlying mask mandate violated various constitutional rights, but the appellate court held that his petition for post-conviction relief was grossly untimely and barred by res judicata. Consequently, the trial court lacked jurisdiction to consider the petition, and the assignment of errors were overruled.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Davis's motion to vacate, filed nearly four years after his conviction and asserting constitutional challenges to a COVID-19 mask mandate, was a petition for post-conviction relief.
- Whether the trial court lacked jurisdiction to consider the petition because it was untimely and Davis did not establish an exception under R.C. 2953.23(A)(1).
- Whether res judicata barred Davis from collaterally attacking issues that he could have raised at trial or on direct appeal.
Holdings
- A post-appeal motion that claims a constitutional violation, seeks to render the criminal judgment void, and asks that the judgment be vacated is a petition for post-conviction relief regardless of the motion's title.
- The trial court lacks jurisdiction to consider an untimely petition for post-conviction relief unless the petitioner satisfies the exceptions in R.C. 2953.23(A), including the requirements identified in R.C. 2953.23(A)(1).
- Res judicata bars a defendant from raising in post-conviction proceedings defenses or due-process claims that were raised or could have been raised at trial or on direct appeal.
Key quotations
“Although designed to address claimed constitutional violations, the postconviction relief process is a civil collateral attack on a criminal judgment, not an appeal of that judgment.” (¶ 11)
“The trial court was therefore without jurisdiction to consider the petition.” (¶ 16)
Factual background
On November 18, 2020, Davis was arrested at a Canton Walmart after refusing to wear a face covering and becoming combative with Walmart staff when asked to wear one or leave. When law enforcement arrived, Davis refused to provide identifying information. He was initially charged with obstructing official business and criminal trespass; the State later amended the first charge to disorderly conduct, dismissed the trespass charge, and Davis pleaded no contest.
Procedural history
Davis pleaded no contest to disorderly conduct in the Canton Municipal Court on March 16, 2021, after the State amended the obstructing-official-business charge and dismissed the criminal-trespass charge. He received a sentence of court costs only and did not file a direct appeal. Nearly four years later, he filed a motion to vacate based on constitutional challenges to Walmart's COVID-19 mask mandate; the municipal court summarily denied the motion on January 27, 2025. The Fifth District affirmed.