State v. Barnes
2021 Ohio 842
Ohio Ct. App.2021Background
- On Sept. 10, 2017, a multi‑shooter exchange at a Cleveland Marathon station left victim Leah McLaurin fatally shot; three shooters fired but ballistic evidence could not identify who killed the victim.
- Barnes was indicted on multiple counts including murder and voluntary manslaughter; he ultimately pled guilty on Sept. 18, 2019 to amended Count 2 (involuntary manslaughter, 3rd degree) as part of a plea agreement; other counts were nolled.
- Before sentencing, Barnes filed a presentence motion (Oct. 31, 2019) to withdraw his plea, later supplemented, claiming innocence, self‑defense under H.B. 228, and that defense counsel failed to provide him certain video/audio evidence (which he said he first reviewed after pleading).
- The trial court held multiple hearings, appointed new counsel when ineffective‑assistance claims arose, reviewed the contested media, heard testimony from Barnes and four prior attorneys, and found counsel competent and the Crim.R. 11 colloquy adequate.
- The court concluded Barnes failed to show a reasonable and legitimate basis to withdraw his plea, denied the motion, and imposed five years of community control; Barnes appealed, arguing abuse of discretion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court abused its discretion denying presentence plea withdrawal | State: trial court complied with Crim.R.11, held full hearings, and considered factors; denial appropriate | Barnes: denial was an abuse of discretion because new video/audio evidence and self‑defense justified withdrawal | Denial affirmed; trial court did not abuse discretion. |
| Whether Barnes had a reasonable, timely basis (new evidence) to withdraw plea | State: Barnes did not timely or specifically show when he first saw the evidence; some claims raised late | Barnes: first reviewed audio/video Oct. 30, 2019 and filed promptly Oct. 31 or supplemented Nov. 6 | Court found timing and amendment issues; original motion did not mention the media; supplementation did not establish a sufficient new basis. |
| Whether ineffective assistance supports withdrawal (failure to provide evidence/hire expert) | State: counsel was highly competent; trial counsel’s decisions reasonable | Barnes: counsel failed to provide media pre‑plea and failed to retain audio experts, prejudicing decision to plead | Court held counsel was competent, full hearings given; appellate claims about experts not raised below and speculative, so insufficient. |
| Whether the State would be prejudiced if withdrawal granted | State: witnesses, plea package with codefendant, and victim’s family would be prejudiced by delay | Barnes: State showed only speculative prejudice; no concrete showing of actual prejudice | Court accepted State’s concerns as valid factors to weigh; prejudice need not be proven conclusively; factor supported denial. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Xie, 62 Ohio St.3d 521 (Ohio 1992) (standard for reviewing presentence motions to withdraw guilty pleas; abuse of discretion review)
- Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (Ohio 1983) (appellate review limited to abuse of discretion)
- State v. Peterseim, 68 Ohio App.2d 211 (Ohio Ct. App.) (factors for plea‑withdrawal proceedings and requirement of full, impartial hearing)
- State v. Smith, 49 Ohio St.2d 261 (Ohio 1977) (movant’s credibility and good faith are for the trial court to resolve)
- Barker v. United States, 579 F.2d 1219 (10th Cir. 1978) (recognizing discretion in determining whether plea‑withdrawal circumstances exist)