State v. Baker
2012 Ohio 1833
Ohio Ct. App.2012Background
- Baker pleaded guilty to amended rape counts under R.C. 2907.02(A)(2) and GSI counts under R.C. 2907.05(A)(4), after a plea deal reducing certain charges and removing SVP specifications.
- Indictment originally charged numerous counts spanning 2009–2010 with additional counts on 12/31/2010; sentencing totaled 32 years (rape counts consecutive; GSI counts concurrent).
- The trial court’s change-of-plea and sentencing entries incorrectly memorialized the amended rape statute as 2907.02(A)(1)(b) instead of 2907.02(A)(2).
- Baker argued Crim.R. 11 defects compromised knowing, voluntary, intelligent entry of the plea; the court maintained substantial compliance.
- A new October 2011 amendment to R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) requiring fact-finding for consecutive terms was not applicable to Baker, who was sentenced in May 2011.
- The allied-offense issue arose post Johnson v. United States; the trial court failed to make required factual inquiries before sentencing on four counts, triggering plain error.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is the sentencing journal entry correct regarding amended rape statute? | State contends entry memorialized 2907.02(A)(1)(b) by mistake. | Baker asserts error invalidates plea sentencing. | Remand for nunc pro tunc correction. |
| Was the Crim.R. 11 plea knowingly, intelligently entered? | State argues substantial compliance given advisements on penalties. | Baker argues noncompliance undermines validity of plea. | Plea knowingly, voluntarily entered. |
| Was any error in applying 2929.14(C)(4) for consecutive sentences? | State contends new rule applies retroactively to all sentences. | Baker asserts rule should have governed the case. | Not applicable to Baker; Foster controls. |
| Are the rape and GSI counts allied offenses subject to merger requiring equivalence of conduct facts? | State contends no merger necessary due to plea and record. | Baker asserts merger should apply due to same conduct/timing. | Plain error; counts 1 and 3 (rape) and 11 and 12 (GSI) vacated; remand to resolve merger. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Engle, 74 Ohio St.3d 525 (Ohio 1996) (plea must be knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily entered)
- State v. Nero, 56 Ohio St.3d 106 (Ohio 1990) (substantial compliance allowable for nonconstitutional Crim.R. 11 components)
- State v. Foster, 109 Ohio St.3d 1 (Ohio 2006) (struck mandatory indeterminate sentencing; governs timing of review)
- State v. Johnson, 128 Ohio St.3d 153 (Ohio 2010) (two-tier test for allied offenses; conduct then animus)
- State v. Underwood, 124 Ohio St.3d 365 (Ohio 2010) (trial court must address allied offenses; waiver not automatic)
- Logan, 60 Ohio St.2d 126 (Ohio 1979) (guidelines for separate animus in kidnapping and underlying crimes)