State v. Blevins
2016 Ohio 8382
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Arron Blevins was charged after digitally penetrating an 11‑month‑old while babysitting; he confessed and admitted drug use during the incident.
- Indicted in case No. 15 CR 079 for rape (R.C. 2907.02(A)(1)(b), life possible) and tampering with evidence; initially pleaded not guilty.
- On Feb. 12, 2016, Blevins pled guilty (by information in 16 CR 015) to rape under R.C. 2907.02(A)(2) (first‑degree felony).
- The plea colloquy and written plea form included Crim.R. 11 advisements (rights waived, maximum penalty, voluntariness); Blevins made an in‑court factual admission.
- On Apr. 8, 2016, the trial court sentenced Blevins to 11 years imprisonment, 5 years mandatory postrelease control, and Tier III sex‑offender registration.
- Blevins appealed, arguing (1) his jury‑trial waiver and plea were not voluntary/knowing and (2) ineffective assistance of counsel during plea negotiations and sentencing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Blevins) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of plea colloquy / waiver of jury trial | Trial court complied with Crim.R. 11; plea form and in‑court colloquy explained rights and effects | Plea invalid because court failed to advise how waiving jury trial affects ability to reverse sentence | Court held plea colloquy satisfied Crim.R. 11; waiver and plea voluntary and knowing — claim rejected |
| Factual basis for plea | Guilty plea and in‑court confession supply factual basis; Crim.R. 11 does not require court to independently establish factual basis | Plea uninformed because there was no factual basis for rape charge | Court held the in‑court confession provided a sufficient factual basis; claim rejected |
| Defendant competence/mental state at plea | Record shows defendant affirmed he was thinking clearly, not coerced, and competent | Plea involuntary because defendant was not feeling well and thus could not intelligently plead | Court found no evidence of incompetence; plea voluntary — claim rejected |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel re: plea decision | Counsel’s advice was strategic given evidence and risk of life sentence; tactical decisions do not equal ineffective assistance | Counsel misadvised to plead guilty despite weak evidence, depriving him of a viable defense | Court applied Strickland/Hester framework and found counsel’s performance reasonable and not prejudicial; claim rejected |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Ballard, 66 Ohio St.2d 473 (explaining Crim.R. 11 colloquy requirements for pleas)
- Craig v. State, 49 Ohio St. 415 (guilty plea is admission of material facts pleaded)
- State v. Post, 32 Ohio St.3d 380 (Crim.R. 11 does not require court to establish factual basis before accepting plea)
- State v. Hester, 45 Ohio St.2d 71 (standard for evaluating whether accused received fair trial)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (ineffective assistance two‑prong test)
- State v. Calhoun, 86 Ohio St.3d 279 (counsel’s duties and prejudice analysis)
- State v. Bradley, 42 Ohio St.3d 136 (standard for prejudice under ineffective‑assistance claim)