[Cite as State v. Popov, 2011-Ohio-372.]

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO 

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT 

LAWRENCE COUNTY 

State of Ohio, : Case No. 10CA26 

 Plaintiff-Appellee, : 

 MEMORANDUM

 v. : DECISION AND

 JUDGMENT ENTRY

Ivan P. Popov, : 

 RELEASED 1/20/11 

 Defendant-Appellant. : 

______________________________________________________________________ 

APPEARANCES: 

Ivan P. Popov, Ross Correctional Institution, Chillicothe, Ohio, pro se appellant. 

J.B. Collier, Jr., Lawrence County Prosecuting Attorney, and Robert C. Anderson, 

Lawrence County Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, Ironton, Ohio, for appellee. 

______________________________________________________________________ 

Harsha, P.J. 

{¶1} Ivan Popov appeals from his prison sentence for violations of community 

control sanctions. The court convicted Popov of robbery and sentenced him to a fouryear prison term. It later granted his request for early judicial release, contingent upon 

completing six months of electronically monitored house arrest and five years of 

community control sanctions. After Popov violated community control sanctions by 

operating a vehicle under the influence, the court sentenced him to a 20-month prison 

term. 

{¶2} Popov raises three assignments of error in this appeal. In his third 

assignment of error, he contends the trial court erred by failing to inform him of his right 

to appeal from the imposition of the 20-month prison term. Assuming that the court did 

err in this regard, our granting of his motion for a delayed appeal renders this 

assignment moot. 
Lawrence App. No. 10CA26 2 

{¶3} In his first assignment of error, Popov argues that he was entitled to credit 

for all time served under court ordered electronically monitored house arrest. In his 

second assignment of error, he contends that the trial court erred by denying him the 

right to present “evidence” in support of this argument at a hearing on community 

control sanctions. However, Popov has been released from prison. Because both 

assignments of error involve issues relating to the length of his sentence, which carries 

no collateral consequences, we consider whether they are moot. 

{¶4} It is appropriate to consider evidence outside the appellate record in 

determining whether an appeal is moot or justiciable. An event that causes a case to 

become moot may be proved by extrinsic evidence. Miner v. Witt (1910), 82 Ohio St. 

237, 239, 92 N.E. 21 (per curiam); see also Pewitt v. Lorain Correctional Inst., 64 Ohio 

St.3d 470, 472, 1992-Ohio-91, 597 N.E.2d 92 (per curiam); State v. McCall, Mahoning 

App. No. 03 MA 82, 2004-Ohio-4026, at ¶7. Our review of the Ohio Department of 

Corrections website at http://www.drc.ohio.gov/OffenderSearch/Search.aspx reveals 

that the state released Popov from prison on September 20, 2010. Then on September 

22, 2010, the state placed Popov on six months of APA supervision, i.e., postrelease 

control, which is set to expire on or about March 22, 2011. 

{¶5} An appeal challenging a felony conviction is justiciable, i.e., not moot, 

even if the defendant has served sentence because the defendant “has a substantial 

stake in the judgment of conviction which survives the satisfaction of the judgment 

imposed upon him or her.” State v. Golston, 71 Ohio St.3d 224, 1994-Ohio-109, 643 

N.E.2d 109, at paragraph one of the syllabus. 
Lawrence App. No. 10CA26 3 

{¶6} However, the same logic does not apply where the defendant is solely 

appealing the length of sentence. An appeal challenging only the length of a sentence 

becomes moot after the defendant has served the sentence. State v. Adams, 

Cuyahoga App. No. 85267, 2005-Ohio-3837, at ¶5; see, also State v. Howard (Feb. 26, 

1991), Scioto App. No. 89CA1840, 1991 WL 28326, at *3. This is because when the 

defendant has served his punishment, “there is no collateral disability or loss of civil 

rights that can be remedied by a modification of the length of the sentence in the 

absence of a reversal of the underlying conviction. * * * [A]nd no relief can be granted * * 

* subsequent to the completion of the sentence if the underlying conviction itself is not 

at issue.” State v. Bostic, Cuyahoga App. No. 84842, 2005-Ohio-2184, at ¶22, quoting 

State v. Beamon, Lake App. No. 2000-L-160, 2001-Ohio-8712, 2001 WL 1602656, at 

*1. 

{¶7} Here, Popov served his prison sentence. The only aspect of his felony 

sentence that he challenges on appeal is the number of days that the trial court should 

have credited towards his 20-month sentence. Thus, he is not challenging the court’s 

right to impose a sentence for a violation of community control; he merely questions the 

correct calculation of jail-time credit. An appeal in his favor on the jail-time credit issue 

would grant him no relief as the state has already released him from prison. 

{¶8} Although the state released Popov, he is currently serving a term of 

postrelease control, until March of 2011. An examination of the postrelease control 

statute demonstrates that it does not render Popov’s appeal in this case justiciable. A 

period of postrelease control is required for certain level felonies in Ohio. R.C. 

2967.28(B). If a defendant violates a condition of postrelease control, the Revised 
Lawrence App. No. 10CA26 4 

Code authorizes the parole authority to impose sanctions for the violation, including a 

prison term. However, the length of the prison term is statutorily limited. The maximum 

term per violation is nine months in prison or up to one-half the defendant’s original 

sentence for multiple violations. See R.C. 2967.28(F)(1)-(3); State v. Clark, 119 Ohio 

St.3d 239, 2008-Ohio-3748, 893 N.E.2d 462, at ¶35. 

{¶9} Assuming that Popov violates postrelease control, our consideration of the 

merits of this assignment of error would not affect the outcome of any subsequent 

sanctions imposed by the parole authority. Even if we found merit in Popov’s argument 

that he was entitled to additional days of jail-time credit on his court imposed sentence, 

the jail-time credit would not reduce the maximum length of the prison term that the 

parole authority could impose for a violation of postrelease control. Consequently, 

postrelease control has no effect on the justiciability of Popov’s appeal. 

{¶10} Accordingly, we reject Popov’s assignments of error as moot. 

JUDGMENT AFFIRMED. 
Lawrence App. No. 10CA26 5 

JUDGMENT ENTRY

 It is ordered that the JUDGMENT IS AFFIRMED and that Appellant shall pay the 

costs. 

 The Court finds there were reasonable grounds for this appeal. 

 It is ordered that a special mandate issue out of this Court directing the Lawrence 

County Common Pleas Court to carry this judgment into execution. 

 IF A STAY OF EXECUTION OF SENTENCE AND RELEASE UPON BAIL HAS 

BEEN PREVIOUSLY GRANTED BY THE TRIAL COURT OR THIS COURT, it is 

temporarily continued for a period not to exceed sixty days upon the bail previously 

posted. The purpose of a continued stay is to allow Appellant to file with the Supreme 

Court of Ohio an application for a stay during the pendency of proceedings in that court. 

If a stay is continued by this entry, it will terminate at the earlier of the expiration of the 

sixty day period, or the failure of the Appellant to file a notice of appeal with the 

Supreme Court of Ohio in the forty-five day appeal period pursuant to Rule II, Sec. 2 of 

the Rules of Practice of the Supreme Court of Ohio. Additionally, if the Supreme Court 

of Ohio dismisses the appeal prior to expiration of sixty days, the stay will terminate as 

of the date of such dismissal. 

 A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to Rule 27 of 

the Rules of Appellate Procedure. Exceptions. 

Kline, J. & McFarland, J.: Concur in Judgment and Opinion. 

 For the Court 

 BY: ______________________________ 

 William H. Harsha, Presiding 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.