State v. Krug
This text of 2024 Ohio 2603 (State v. Krug) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
[Cite as State v. Krug, 2024-Ohio-2603.]
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO ELEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT LAKE COUNTY
STATE OF OHIO, CASE NO. 2024-L-040
Plaintiff-Appellee, Civil Appeal from the - vs - Court of Common Pleas
JON P. KRUG, Trial Court No. 2008 CR 000008 Defendant-Appellant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Decided: July 8, 2024 Judgment: Appeal dismissed
Charles E. Coulson, Lake County Prosecutor, and Teri R. Daniel, Assistant Prosecutor, Lake County Administration Building, 105 Main Street, P.O. Box 490, Painesville, OH 44077 (For Plaintiff-Appellee).
Jon P. Krug, pro se, PID# A544-929, Richland Correctional Institution, 1001 Olivesburg Road, P.O. Box 8107, Mansfield, OH 44901 (Defendant-Appellant).
MARY JANE TRAPP, J.
{¶1} On June 11, 2024, appellant, Jon P. Krug, filed a pro se notice of appeal
from the trial court’s May 7, 2024 judgment entry treating appellant’s pro se motions as
petitions for postconviction relief and denying them as untimely without a hearing.
{¶2} App.R. 4(A)(1) states that “a party who wishes to appeal from an order that
is final upon its entry shall file the notice of appeal required by App.R. 3 within 30 days of
that entry.” {¶3} Furthermore, postconviction proceedings are considered civil in nature.
State v. Nichols, 11 Ohio St.3d 40, 40-42 (1984); see also State v. Jones, 2021-Ohio-
1696, ¶ 6 (11th Dist.).
{¶4} App.R. 4(A)(3) states, in relevant part:
{¶5} “In a civil case, if the clerk has not completed service of notice of the
judgment within the three-day period prescribed in Civ.R. 58(B), the 30-day periods
referenced in App.R. 4(A)(1) and 4(A)(2) begin to run on the date when the clerk actually
completes service.”
{¶6} Here, there is a notation on the docket reflecting the clerk mailed a copy of
the May 7, 2024 entry to appellant on May 8, 2024, which is within the three-day period
prescribed in Civ.R. 58(B). Therefore, a timely notice of appeal from the May 7, 2024
entry was due no later than June 6, 2024, which was not a holiday or weekend. The
appeal is untimely by five days. The time requirement is jurisdictional in nature and may
not be enlarged by an appellate court. State ex rel. Pendell v. Adams Cty. Bd. of
Elections, 40 Ohio St.3d 58, 60 (1988); see also App.R. 14(B).
{¶7} Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed, sua sponte, as untimely.
MATT LYNCH, J.,
ROBERT J. PATTON, J.,
concur.
Case No. 2024-L-040
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2024 Ohio 2603, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-krug-ohioctapp-2024.