State v. Boware, 2014 Ohio 5779

In August 1993 Melvin Boware pleaded guilty to one count of gross sexual imposition; the court imposed a one-year sentence suspended in favor of two years probation. No direct appeal was taken; probation was later terminated early.
Beginning in 2013 Boware filed multiple post-conviction motions, claiming the State misidentified his accuser (both named “Patricia”) and that he would not have pleaded guilty had he known the true identity.
The trial court denied his 2013 petition and subsequent motions; this Court affirmed earlier denials on appeal. Boware continued to file motions (including for DNA testing) through 2014.
In May–July 2014 the trial court denied renewed motions to vacate his plea and related requests; Boware appealed the denials to the Ninth District Court of Appeals.
The sole assignment of error argued that denying withdrawal of his plea constituted a manifest injustice because the State failed to reveal the accuser’s identity.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Boware established manifest injustice warranting vacation of his guilty plea under Crim.R. 32.1	Boware: He would not have pleaded guilty if the State had properly identified which "Patricia" accused him; misidentification undermines voluntariness and fairness of plea	State: Argument is barred by res judicata; Boware failed to present supporting evidence	The court held Boware's claim is barred by res judicata because the same issue had been previously raised and litigated; motion to withdraw plea denied

State v. Ketterer, 126 Ohio St.3d 448 (2010) (res judicata bars claims raised or that could have been raised on direct appeal and extends to motions under Crim.R. 32.1)