^ "2.-^S7-r^ ( Y _. 44/A? 5P. ^ a _. supreme C urt OF oh,o. , ^! ^ _ Cc ... IC^-^^^^ c_

Transcription

1 _. 44/A? 5P....-., : r,.. _ ,! _ Cc _ _.._. _ J P f t < _. N)f.'..:.. r.... IC- c_ :..: _ &0, _ a _ I... _ "2.-S7-r.,?...:.. O+'4Jl+ "+f tl -.l.d ' :... ( Y s3 ot ' : r......l, \ " + D'`... _.,.jv _ ,. _:.._ : -. '. S. -. v ` /J. : ,,. ( 4....,. _ _..-. r _.._. _... -._ hf?';!.- z«iryrr,x,...._.._....._.._ _ _..-._- ---j ,. ; -x ; i f f ', VEID... - _ , Y Yr 5 s s :fi #, rr rj.. ;se3r.....u.,..v :.._ _ 'Z 0 14 CLERK QF CaURT supreme C urt OF oh,o _ _... :_.. _

2 '" " " f!. M.At :kc 1JY _ _... t._ c-e -.. _,-..._.rr:...:: '...I:" ",f.i_..._ ,,. V"! 1C_.,_...<. j..._.(ai._ '_..... tolv ,., CO; Ce c } u; JS_}, C -P_g1, Pos ij, p r t l y - ` a.e. _ : tac,6v) ' )c tlo;. CA.. il,31.1rd._... '.. 2.c31`1 v.`...w.f.'c- c3:r. $`,. `rjp' EIi" (` / _... '.Z.:.:i. -4j.`1S......,:.tn.....',.4. f...%",...%?gt t l(o vdi3 6! boj _ SIZ,_....,.,,\:... ` ". f OvYl, 1. :. trv.... t I"AAAA _-:.:1..._..r / t... J ( ` i" r - ')4! Gt... a.._ Ir1...+;3w't`.1C F1-4y. Xf (,.. ` (} INAVS \ C:,f ' v.. a A'`, :_.l,t '..._._`!`'+a'i"..'' 1-!. j '`l(s. c3we;.a':z. L., J.e'` M;k 1I _ "C:l G......_ Sih t ac-.....:...:..._-.._..._ _ I Z-30 {.A d Z

3 _ _ _...:.. x..._.. kal _ _. _ + {-' Ar, :.,... -a-,... i CjV'3i,' _... ci E;,f _ Of... GA-; A.. tv: :. _ C_: o4 A,\.. v se. Q _ Ken,,n -._ o_ be-r._k... C C..'e_J Cd iz. 6,,jVY,. tl _, : C; ` l c..,.f p... %...: / + i......l"1.jj,fll ::... N{ -ti 1''1vA:t... --f 'r ` ::-._. '. 1da Jf` {!' _ _... e ;. S s..... _ W L:v.N.l.'r',. - '- J.. a G. [, Y/ /y pld oc-c-43'ss c,n5 S c:._ * : _. :Jz 6-5e.-rt....t.C%._.../.[ t - y... : '.... / VVV... EL S G..-.,/F. C......

4 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO HAMILTON COUNTY, OHIO STATE OF OHIO, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. MARK B. SPRINGER, APPEAL NO. C TRIAL NO. B-88o5912 JUDGMEN'1'ENTRY. Defenda:nt-Appellant. We consider this appeal on the accelerated calendar, and this judgment entry is not an opinion of the court. See S,Ct.R.Rep.Op. 2; App.R. ii.i(e); i:st Dist. Loc.R Defendant-appellant Mark B. Springer appeals from the Hamilton County Common Pleas Court's judgment denying his "Motion to Re-Address Judgment and Set Aside Sentence ***." We affirm the court's judgment as modified. Springer was convicted in 1989 upon jury verdicts finding him guilty of aggravated murder, murder, aggravated robbery, and aggravated burglary. He unsuccessfully challenged his convictions on direct appeal, State v. Springer, zst Dist. Hamilton No. i,-8907o3, i9gv Ohio App. LEXIS 5854 (Oct. 22, 2uoS), reversed, 63 Ohio St.3d 167, 586 N.E.2d 96 (1992), and in postconviction motions filed in 2005, 2oo9, and In this appeal from the overruling of his 2013 "Motion to Re-Address Judgment and Set Aside Sentence ***," he advances four assignments of error. We address first, and overrule, Springer's fourth assignment of error, which essentially challenges the overruling of his motion. In his motion, Springer sought a new trial under Crim.R. 33(A)(1), on the ground that his aggravated-robbery conviction was void because the indictment had omitted the offense's mens rea element. A Crim.R. 33(A)(1) motion for a new trial on the ground of an irregularity in the proceedings must

5 Okito F[RS'r DISTRICT Cot1RT of APPEALS be filed either within 14. days of the return of the verdict or within seven days after leave to file a new-trial motion has been granted. And leave may be granted only upon "clear and convincing [evidence]" that the movant had been "unavoidably prevented" from timely filing his new-trial motion. See Crim.R. 33(B). The common pleas court cannot be said to have erred in denying Springer the relief sought, when he did not move for leave to file his new-trial motion out of time, and the record is devoid of evidence demonstrating unavoidable prevention. See State v. Schiebel, 55 Ohio St.3d 71, 74, 564 N.E.2d 54 (iggo). Accord State v. Hawkins, 1st Dist. Hamilton No. C-11o291, v nr :y. i? "til We also overrule the balance of Springer's assignments of error. This court has jurisdiction to review only the judgment from which Springer appeals. In that judgment, the common pleas court overruled Springer's Crim.R. 33 motion. In doing so, the court did not rule upon, because Springer had not asserted in his motion, the challenges to his convictions advanced in his first, second, and third assignments of error. Therefore, we are without jurisdiction to review those challenges in this appeal from the judgment denying Springer's motion. See State v. Gipson, ist Dist. Nos. C-96o867 and C-96o88x, 1997 Ohio App. LEXIS 4404 (Sept. 26, xg97) Finally, a court has jurisdiction to correct a void judgment. See State ex rel. Cruzado v. Zaleski, iii Ohio St.3d 353, 2oo6-Ohio-5795, 856 N.E.2d 263, But none of the errors alleged here or before the common pleas court would have rendered Springer's convictions void. Accordingly, we affirm the court's judgment. A certified copy of this judgment entry is the mandate, which shall be sent to the trial court under App.R. 27. Costs shall be taxed under App.R. 24. DrNKELACKER, P.J., FzscxEx and DEWiNE, JJ. To the clerk: Enter upon the journal oft e c 6rton Nove ber 22,2013 per order of the court Presiding Judge 2

6 In The Supreme Court of Ohio Mark B. Springer, Vs. Appellant, On appeal from the Hamilton County Court of Appeals first Appellate District State of Ohio, Appellee, App.No. C Trial No. B Notice of Appeal of Appellant Mark B. Springer (prose) # St. Rt.63 P.O. Box 120 Lebanon, Ohio Scott M. Heenan p Assistant Prosecuting Attorney 230 East 9th Street, Suite 4000 Cincinnati, Ohio E JAN 08 ZDt4 CLERK OF COURT

7 CIiIEF JUSTICE MAUREEN O'CONNOR T4je $uprnte (f jazxrf af J'in OFFICE OF THE CLERK 65 SOUTH FRONT STREET, COLUMBUS, OH CLERK OF THE COURT MARK H. REED JUSTICES PAUL E. PFEIFER TERRENCE O'DONNELL JLIDITII ANN LANZINGER SHARON L. KENNEDY TELEPHONE ;9530 FACSIMILE svww.supremecourk ohio.gov JUDITH L. FRENCH WILLIAM M. O'NEILL Mark B. Springer Warren Correctional Institution P.O. Box 120 Lebanon, Ohio January 9, 2014 Re: State of f Ohio v. Mark B. Springer First District Court of Appeals Case No. C Dear Mr. Springer: The enclosed notice of appeal and memorandum in support ofjurisdiction from the November 22, 2013 decision in the above-referenced court of appeals case were not filed because they are untimely. Pursuant to Rule 7.01(A)(1)(a)(i) of the Rules of Practice of the Supreme Court of Ohio, an appeal must be filed within forty-five days after the date the court of appeals filed its judgment with its clerk. To timely appeal a November 22, 2013 court of appeals decision, your notice of appeal, memorandum in support of jurisdiction, and affidavit of indigence were due in the clerk's office no later than January 6,2014. The enclosed materials were received on January 8, Pursuant to Rule 7.01(A)(1)(b), the clerk's office must refuse to file a notice of appeal and memorandum in support of jurisdiction received after the forty-five day time period has passed. Accordingly, your documents were not filed and are being returned. If you timely filed an application for reconsideration or en banc consideration in the court of appeals, please see Rule 7.01(A)(3) and Rule 7.01(A)(6), respectively. Please note, however, that the provision for delayed appeal under Rule 7.01(A)(4) does not apply to appeals involving postconviction relief, and Rule 7.01(A)(4)(c) forbids the clerk's office from filing motions for delayed appeal involving postconviction relief. For additional information, please see the copy of the Rules of Practice on file with your institution's library. Sincerely, Nathan Deputy Clerk Enclosures

8 In The Supreme Court of Ohio State of Ohio, Appellee, App.No. C Trial No. B Mark B. Springer, Vs. Appellant, On appeal from the Hamilton County Court of Appeals first Appellate District Memorandum in Support of Jurisdiction of Defendant Appellant Mark B. Springer Mark B. Springer (prose) # St. Rt.63 P.O. Box 120 Lebanon, Ohio Scott M. Heenan p Assistant Prosecuting Attorney 230 East 9th Street, Suite 4000 Cincinnati, Ohio JAN 08 Z014 CLERK OF COURT REME COURT OF C

9 91701? ddt! ul # d aleluul 7.NHNV3 Ja14seD 3IIHNI NOtll18lu181C ( 10/ 'nar) voot DkJQ :passaood ateq =b11\ d!4s -- t :psseu} }/yt :Ag panoldd y/ :jaqwnn 1103 '8 N0019 :aaquann :aan;eu6is satr;usul 4 ',firjiqtsuodsa.i Euraupug auitissu iir.us aieuzui aqt srqt jo ustzlaa aut ui stlttsa.z tlozqm ssa.rpp-e atit ur.zo.ua uli Jo tuana acp ui taa.r.roa sr pup aluuzur atit Sq zo oa paz uaaq srqanoqr paasri uorzu:txo.ui at. amp sarjaa jsan.ba.z Imxpqlim st xp uo aanat Ors s aluzut araz # xd Ino--4:)aqj q osrw q CIT q saulod q a9e;soad t 4! t "'. e ;. :stuaa ciiis-in-p patj:d :seiloa ILL1P.X?1,,.TM.J{ V [LUOi.Xcd ;.:.,., n_. on. PersonalA / C Withdrawal Roltars: Cents: - Check out-sli Date: --:- [Address: " 12A"t State; Zip Coda; { i VOstage q Copies q IIy q Ivlisc. q Check-out CK # _ The inmate's signature on this withdrawal request verifies that the infornation listed above has been read to or by the inmate and is correct. In the event of an erxor in the address which results in the return of this package, the inmate shall assume financial responsibility. lnmate's Signature: Number: Block umber '.` ARProved f3y: Witnessed, T-- Ship VIA: Date Processed: DRC 1004 (Rev. 3/07 ) QISTRtBUTtON; WHITE - Cashier CANARY- Inmate Pink- ACA 4046 &k>o

10