2018 Ohio 2075
Ohio Ct. App.2018Background
- Mark E. Carnes was indicted in 2014 on multiple sexual-offense counts involving two minor female victims (alleged conduct from 2009–2014).
- Carnes pleaded guilty to 5 counts of unlawful sexual conduct with a minor, 5 counts of compelling prostitution (later merged), and 11 counts of illegal use of a minor in nudity-oriented material; 5 rape counts were nolled.
- Sentencing (Nov. 2014): five merged unlawful-sexual-conduct counts run consecutively (60 months each) and eleven nudity-related counts run concurrently with each other but consecutively to the other counts, for a 33-year aggregate term; $10,000 fine and Tier II sex-offender classification.
- Carnes appealed his sentence and lost (affirmed in a direct appeal).
- In May and July 2017 Carnes filed post-sentence motions to withdraw his guilty plea, arguing the indictment was duplicitous/multiplicitous and violated due process and double jeopardy; both motions were denied without a hearing.
- Carnes appealed the denial of the second motion; the trial court and the appellate court treated the claim as one that could have been raised on direct appeal and as failing to show manifest injustice warranting plea withdrawal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether post-sentence withdrawal of a guilty plea is required because the indictment was duplicitous/multiplicitous and violated double jeopardy | State: motion is barred by res judicata because the claim could have been raised on direct appeal | Carnes: indictment contained multiple/duplicitous counts and incorrect dates of birth, rendering plea unintelligent and violating double jeopardy/due process | Motion to withdraw denied; claim barred by res judicata and, alternatively, Carnes failed to show manifest injustice |
| Whether the trial court abused its discretion in denying Crim.R. 32.1 motion without a hearing | State: trial court did not abuse discretion; denial proper given res judicata and lack of manifest injustice | Carnes: factual/indictment defects required withdrawal and hearing | No abuse of discretion found; denial affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Caraballo, 17 Ohio St.3d 66 (Ohio 1985) (motion to withdraw guilty plea post-sentencing requires showing of manifest injustice)
- State v. Smith, 49 Ohio St.2d 261 (Ohio 1977) (standards for withdrawal of guilty plea and appellate review of such motions)
- State v. Peterseim, 68 Ohio App.2d 211 (Ohio Ct. App. 1979) (defendant’s credibility is for trial court when ruling on plea-withdrawal motion)
- State v. Ketterer, 126 Ohio St.3d 448 (Ohio 2010) (res judicata bars claims raised or that could have been raised on direct appeal)
- State v. Perry, 10 Ohio St.2d 175 (Ohio 1967) (doctrine of res judicata in criminal appeals)