State v. Patterson

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

[Cite as State v. Patterson, 2010-Ohio-645.] COURT OF APPEALS STARK COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT STATE OF OHIO Plaintiff-Appellee JUDGES: Hon. William B. Hoffman, P.J. Hon. Sheila G. Farmer, J. Hon. John W. Wise, J. -vsCase No. 2009-CA-00198 JUVALIAN CALVIN PATTERSON Defendant-Appellant OPINION CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: Appeal from the Stark County Court of Common Pleas, Case No. 2001-CR-1623 JUDGMENT: Affirmed DATE OF JUDGMENT ENTRY: February 22, 2010 APPEARANCES: For Plaintiff-Appellee For Defendant-Appellant JOHN D. FERRERO, PROSECUTING ATTORNEY, STARK COUNTY, OHIO JUVALIAN C. PATTERSON, PRO SE Mansfield Correctional Camp Inmate No. 423-549 P.O. Box 788 Mansfield, Ohio 44901 By: RONALD MARK CALDWELL Assistant Prosecuting Attorney Appellate Section 110 Central Plaza, South Suite 510 Canton, Ohio 44702-1413 Stark County, Case No. 2009-CA-00198 2 Hoffman, P.J. {¶1} Defendant-appellant Juvalian C. Patterson appeals his sentence entered by the Stark County Court of Common Pleas. Plaintiff-appellee is the State of Ohio. STATEMENT OF THE FACTS AND CASE {¶2} On December 20, 2001, the Stark County Grand Jury indicted Appellant on one count of aggravated burglary, in violation of R.C. 2911.11(A)(2), a felony of the first degree; one count of robbery, in violation of R.C. 2911.02(A)(2), a felony of the second degree; and one count of carrying a concealed weapon, in violation of R.C. 2923.12(A), a felony of the fourth degree. The aggravated burglary charge contained a firearm specification. {¶3} On February 11, 2002, Appellant withdrew his former not guilty plea, and entered a plea of guilty to the charges contained in the indictment. {¶4} As memorialized in a Judgment Entry filed on February 15, 2002, Appellant was sentenced to three years in prison for aggravated burglary, and to a consecutive three year sentence on the firearm specification. Appellant also was sentenced to three years in prison for the robbery charge. The trial court, in its entry, ordered that such sentence be served concurrently with the aggravated burglary sentence. With respect to the charge of carrying a concealed weapon, the trial court sentenced appellant to eleven months in prison, to be served concurrently with the sentences for aggravated burglary and robbery. Thus, appellant's aggregate prison sentence in the case sub judice was six years. Finally, the trial court, in its entry, ordered that appellant's sentence in this matter be served concurrently with the underlying sentence in case number 2002CR0100, but must be served consecutive to Stark County, Case No. 2009-CA-00198 3 the firearm specification in that case, for a combined total for both cases of nine (9) years in prison. {¶5} Subsequently, Appellant filed a petition for post-conviction relief, as well as a motion to withdraw guilty plea, which motions were denied by the trial court. Appellant also filed a direct appeal from his conviction and sentence to this Court, which overruled the assigned errors and affirmed his conviction and sentence. Appellant then filed three motions for judicial release. {¶6} Appellant filed a motion for jail time credit, which the trial court overruled via Judgment Entry of February 28, 2007, finding Appellant already received 90 days jail time credit. Appellant did not appeal the February 28, 2007 Judgment Entry denying his motion for jail time credit; rather, Appellant renewed the motion two years later. Via Judgment Entry of July 28, 2009, the trial court again overruled the motion finding Appellant had previously received 90 days jail time credit. {¶7} Appellant now appeals, assigning as sole error: {¶8} I. THE TRIAL COURT VIOLATED APPELLANT S CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO EQUAL PROTECTION WHEN [THE] COURT DENIED / FAILURE TO ORDER THE BUREAU OF SENTENCE COMPUTATION OFFICE TO CREDIT THE APPELLANT (90) DAYS OF JAIL TIME CREDIT HE IS ENTITLED TO ACCORDING TO LAW AND TRIAL COURT VIOLATED APPELLANT S RIGHTS BY MISAPPLYING JAIL TIME CREDIT BY NOT APPLYING THE 90 DAYS CREDIT TOWARDS EACH TERM, WHICH 90 DAYS CREDIT SHOULD BE REDUCED OFF OF APPELLANT S TOTAL TERM. Stark County, Case No. 2009-CA-00198 4 I {¶9} Under the doctrine of res judicata, [a] valid, final judgment rendered upon the merits bars all subsequent actions based upon any claim arising out of the transaction or occurrence that was the subject matter of the previous action. State ex rel. Denton v. Bedinghaus, 98 Ohio St.3d 298, 301, 2003-Ohio-861, 784 N.E.2d 99, quoting Grava v. Parkman Twp., 73 Ohio St.3d 379, 1995-Ohio-331, 653 N.E.2d 226, syllabus. Thus, a final judgment on the merits of an action precludes the parties from relitigating issues that were or could have been raised in that action. Trojanski v. George, Cuyahoga App. No. 83472, 2004-Ohio-2414. Moreover, the doctrine of res judicata prohibits a collateral attack on an otherwise final judgment. Southridge Civic Assn. v. Parma, Cuyahoga App. No. 80230, 2002-Ohio-2748. {¶10} Upon review, Appellant s argument could have been raised on direct appeal of his original convictions and sentence entered February 15, 2002 as well as from the trial court s February 28, 2007. As Appellant did not appeal the latter judgment entry, the subsequent motion for jail time credit filed two years later amounts to a collateral attack on the trial court s previous entry and is barred by res judicata. Stark County, Case No. 2009-CA-00198 5 {¶11} The judgment of the Stark County Court of Common Pleas is affirmed. By: Hoffman, P.J. Farmer, J. and Wise, J. concur s/ William B. Hoffman ________________ HON. WILLIAM B. HOFFMAN s/ Sheila G. Farmer___________________ HON. SHEILA G. FARMER s/ John W. Wise______________________ HON. JOHN W. WISE Stark County, Case No. 2009-CA-00198 6 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR STARK COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT STATE OF OHIO Plaintiff-Appellee -vsJUVALIAN CALVIN PATTERSON Defendant-Appellant : : : : : : : : : JUDGMENT ENTRY Case No. 2009-CA-00198 For the reason stated in our accompanying Opinion, the judgment of the Stark County Court of Common Pleas is affirmed. Costs to Appellant. s/ William B. Hoffman _________________ HON. WILLIAM B. HOFFMAN s/ Sheila G. Farmer __________________ HON. SHEILA G. FARMER s/ John W. Wise______________________ HON. JOHN W. WISE

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.