State v. Reyes ( 2020 )

[Cite as State v. Reyes, 2020-Ohio-4955.]
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
ELEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
PORTAGE COUNTY, OHIO
STATE OF OHIO, : MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff-Appellee, :
CASE NO. 2020-P-0048
- vs - :
WALTER E. REYES, :
Defendant-Appellant. :
Criminal Appeal from the Portage County Court of Common Pleas, Case No. 2009 CR
00623.
Judgment: Appeal dismissed.
Victor V. Vigluicci, Portage County Prosecutor, and Pamela J. Holder, Assistant
Prosecutor, 241 South Chestnut Street, Ravenna, Ohio 44266 (For Plaintiff-Appellee).
Walter E. Reyes, pro-se, A590-238, Richland Correctional Institution, 1001 Olivesburg
Road, P.O. Box 8107, Mansfield, Ohio 44905 (Defendant-Appellant).
THOMAS R. WRIGHT, J.
{¶1} Appellant, Walter E. Reyes, appeals the trial court’s May 6, 2020 decision
overruling a nonexistent motion for judicial release. We dismiss.
{¶2} Reyes pleaded guilty to four counts of rape and one count of violating a
protective order in June 2010. He was sentenced to an aggregate prison term of 30 years
and labeled a Tier III sex offender. State v. Reyes, 11th Dist. Portage No. 2015-P-0009,
2015-Ohio-5344, 55 N.E.3d 485, ¶ 2.
{¶3} On April 29, 2020, Reyes moved the trial court to re-enter its original
sentencing entry. He did not move for judicial release. Seven days later the trial court
issued the appealed judgment which states in its entirety: “The Defendant’s Motion for
Judicial Release is denied without a hearing. It is so ordered.”
{¶4} The parties urge us to construe the appealed judgment as denying Reyes’
motion to re-enter sentence and conclude that the trial court simply mischaracterized its
ruling. While that may be, it is not the only possibility and far from a certainty. Because it
is unclear, we decline and construe the judgment consistent with what it purports to
adjudicate.
{¶5} A judgment denying judicial release is not appealable. R.C. 2502.02(B)(1);
State v. Ingram, 10th Dist. Franklin No. 03AP-149, 2003-Ohio-5380, ¶ 6; State v.
Greene, 2d Dist. Greene No. 02-CA-17, 2002-Ohio-2595, *1; State v. Headley, 11th Dist.
Trumbull No. 2008-T-0126, 2009-Ohio-402, ¶ 4. Moreover, the appealed judgment does
not decide the motion to re-enter sentence, which remains pending.
{¶6} The appeal is dismissed for lack of a final appealable order.
CYNTHIA WESTCOTT RICE, J.,
MARY JANE TRAPP, J.,
concur.
2