State v. Purdin , 2012 Ohio 752 ( 2012 )


Menu:
  • [Cite as State v. Purdin, 
    2012-Ohio-752
    .]
    IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO
    FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
    ADAMS COUNTY
    State of Ohio,                        :
    :
    Plaintiff-Appellee,             :
    :          Case No. 11CA909
    v.                              :
    :          DECISION AND
    Rocky Purdin,                         :          JUDGMENT ENTRY
    :
    Defendant-Appellant.            :          Filed: February 23, 2012
    _____________________________________________________________________
    APPEARANCES:
    Timothy Young, State Public Defender, and Craig M. Jaquith, Assistant State Public
    Defender, Columbus, Ohio, for Appellant.
    C. David Kelley, Adams County Prosecutor, and Mark R. Weaver, Adams County
    Assistant Prosecutor, West Union, Ohio, for Appellee.
    _____________________________________________________________________
    Kline, J.:
    {¶1} Rocky Purdin appeals the judgment of the Adams County Court of Common
    Pleas, which convicted him of murder. Purdin asserts four assignments of error. But,
    because there is no final appealable order in this case, we lack jurisdiction to consider
    the merits of Purdin’s appeal. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal.
    I.
    {¶2} On December 5, 2010, Purdin shot and killed his stepson, William Stunich,
    during an altercation. The grand jury issued a three-count indictment against Purdin.
    The case went to trial, and Purdin faced the following counts: Count I, murder, in
    violation of R.C. 2903.02(A); Count II, felony murder, in violation of R.C. 2903.02(B);
    and Count III, reckless homicide, in violation of R.C. 2903.041(A).
    Adams App. No. 11CA909                                                                  2
    {¶3} Purdin admitted that he shot Stunich. Purdin, however, claimed that he did
    so in self-defense. The jury began deliberating on a Friday evening, and it continued
    deliberating until the early morning hours of the following Saturday. Eventually, the jury
    informed the trial court that it had reached verdicts on Counts II and III, but the jury
    could not reach a verdict on Count I. The jury found Purdin guilty of Count II (felony
    murder) and guilty of Count III (reckless homicide). And because the jury was
    deadlocked, the trial court declared a mistrial for Count I.
    {¶4} The trial court merged Counts II and III and sentenced Purdin to fifteen
    years to life for felony murder. The trial court also imposed a three-year sentence,
    based on a firearm specification, to be served consecutively to Purdin’s felony-murder
    sentence. Thus, Purdin’s aggregate prison sentence is eighteen years to life.
    {¶5} Purdin appeals and asserts the following assignments of error: I. “Jury
    deliberations that commenced at 9:00 p.m. on a Friday night and ended after 3:30 a.m.
    the following Saturday morning violated Mr. Purdin’s rights as guaranteed by the Fifth,
    Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, and by Sections
    10 and 16, Article I of the Ohio Constitution.” II. “Prosecutorial misconduct deprived Mr.
    Purdin of his constitutionally guaranteed right to a fair trial, in violation of the Fifth and
    Fourteenth Amendments, to the United States Constitution and Section 10, Article I of
    the Ohio Constitution.” III. “Mr. Purdin’s convictions are against the manifest weight of
    the evidence, in violation of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States
    Constitution and Section 16, Article I of the Ohio Constitution.” And, IV. “The trial court
    erred in its instructions to the jury on the law of self-defense in a case in which the
    defendant was assaulted in his own home, and thereby deprived Mr. Purdin of his right
    Adams App. No. 11CA909                                                                     3
    to a fair trial before a properly instructed jury, and his right to due process of law, as
    guaranteed by the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States
    Constitution, and Sections 10 and 16, Article I of the Ohio Constitution.”
    II.
    {¶6} Before we may consider the merits of Purdin’s appeal, we must determine
    whether the trial court’s judgment entry is a final appealable order. “A court of appeals
    has no jurisdiction over orders that are not final and appealable.” State v. Baker, 
    119 Ohio St.3d 197
    , 
    2008-Ohio-3330
    , at ¶6, citing Section 3(B)(2), Article IV, Ohio
    Constitution; see, also, R.C. 2505.02. “If a court’s order is not final and appealable, we
    have no jurisdiction to review the matter and must dismiss the appeal.” State v. Darget,
    Scioto App. No. 09CA3306, 
    2010-Ohio-3541
    , at ¶4, citing Eddie v. Saunders, Gallia
    App. No. 07CA7, 
    2008-Ohio-4755
    , at ¶11. “If the parties do not raise the jurisdictional
    issue, we must raise it sua sponte.” Darget at ¶4, citing Sexton v. Conley (Aug. 7,
    2000), Scioto App. No. 99CA2655; see, also, Whitaker-Merrell v. Geupel Co. (1972), 
    29 Ohio St.2d 184
    , 186.
    {¶7} “In a criminal matter, if a trial court fails to dispose of all the criminal
    charges, the order appealed from is not a final, appealable order.” State v. Rothe,
    Fairfield App. No. 2008 CA 44, 
    2009-Ohio-1852
    , at ¶9, citing State v. Robinson, Stark
    App. No. 2007CA349, 
    2008-Ohio-5885
    ; State v. Coffman, Delaware App. No.
    06CAA90062, 
    2007-Ohio-3765
    . “In the case of a hung jury, jeopardy does not
    terminate when a hung jury is discharged, rather the case against the defendant
    remains pending until the remaining charge is either retried and/or dismissed with
    prejudice.” Rothe at ¶9, citing Robinson at ¶11, in turn citing State v. Cole, Cuyahoga
    Adams App. No. 11CA909                                                              4
    App. No. 88722, 
    2007-Ohio-3076
    . “Unless a dismissal of the hung jury charge is
    documented by a signed journal entry which is filed with the court, the order of the trial
    court remains interlocutory and is not a final, appealable order.” Rothe at ¶9, citing
    Robinson at ¶11, in turn citing State v. Huntsman (Mar. 13, 2000), Stark App. No.1999-
    CA-282.
    {¶8} Here, as stated above, the trial court declared a mistrial on Count I because
    the jury was deadlocked. In a March 14, 2011 judgment entry, the trial court stated that
    “the jury advised the Court that [it was] unable to reach a unanimous decision as relates
    to Count I.” The judgment entry also states that “the Court hereby declares a mistrial in
    this matter solely to Count I of the indictment.” The March 14, 2011 Entry did not,
    however, dismiss Count I against Purdin.
    {¶9} On March 18, 2011, the trial court filed a “Judgment Entry on Sentence,”
    and, on April 4, 2011, the trial court filed an “Amended Judgment Entry on Sentence for
    Purposes of Restitution.” The April 4, 2011 Amended Entry (1) imposes Purdin’s prison
    sentence on Counts II and III and (2) orders restitution to various individuals and entities
    to cover the victim’s funeral expenses. The Amended Entry does not reference Count I.
    (The March 18, 2011 Entry does not reference Count I either.)
    {¶10} The record indicates that Count I against Purdin has neither been
    dismissed nor retried. Consequently, Count I remains pending against Purdin.
    Therefore, there is no final appealable order in this case, and we lack jurisdiction to
    consider the merits of Purdin’s appeal. See Rothe at ¶10 (“[T]he record reflects that the
    jury was unable to reach a verdict on Count Six of the indictment which charged
    appellant with assault on a peace officer, and the court declared a mistrial. The charge
    Adams App. No. 11CA909                                                           5
    was not dismissed, nor was appellant retried on that charge. Based on the status of the
    record, the charge of assault on a peace officer remains pending. Therefore, the
    judgment appealed from is not a final, appealable order and the appeal must be
    dismissed.”).
    {¶11} Accordingly, we dismiss Purdin’s appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
    APPEAL DISMISSED.
    Adams App. No. 11CA909                                                            6
    JUDGMENT ENTRY
    It is ordered that the APPEAL BE DISMISSED. Appellant shall pay the costs
    herein taxed.
    The Court finds there were reasonable grounds for this appeal.
    It is ordered that a special mandate issue out of this Court directing the
    Adams County Court of Common Pleas to carry this judgment into execution.
    A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to Rule
    27 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure. Exceptions.
    Abele, P.J. and McFarland, J.: Concur in Judgment and Opinion.
    For the Court
    BY:_____________________________
    Roger L. Kline, Judge
    NOTICE TO COUNSEL
    Pursuant to Local Rule No. 14, this document constitutes a final judgment
    entry and the time period for further appeal commences from the date of filing
    with the clerk.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 11CA909

Citation Numbers: 2012 Ohio 752

Judges: Kline

Filed Date: 2/23/2012

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/30/2014