State v. Conn
2015 Ohio 5037
Ohio Ct. App.2015Background
- Anthony Conn was indicted on 50 steroid-related counts; he pled guilty to eight counts and a forfeiture specification in exchange for dismissal of 42 counts and was sentenced to an aggregate prison term (later reduced on remand to four years).
- Before pleading, trial counsel had filed a motion to suppress alleging illegal electronic surveillance, faulty warrants/execution, improper police tactics, and illegally elicited statements. The trial court did not decide that motion before Conn pled guilty.
- Conn appealed his convictions and sentence; this court remanded for the trial court to make statutory findings for consecutive sentences and then affirmed the convictions.
- Conn then filed a petition for postconviction relief arguing trial counsel was ineffective for not pursuing the motion to suppress prior to advising him to plead guilty. The trial court denied the petition without an evidentiary hearing.
- On appeal from denial of postconviction relief, the Twelfth District held Conn’s claims were barred by res judicata and, alternatively, that he failed to show prejudice or to present competent outside-the-record evidence requiring a hearing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether res judicata bars Conn's postconviction challenge to trial counsel's handling of the suppression motion | Conn contends counsel was ineffective for not pursuing the suppression motion before his guilty plea | Trial court/state: Conn could have raised these issues on direct appeal; the record contained the suppression motion | Court: barred by res judicata because issues were or could have been raised on direct appeal and no new outside-the-record evidence was presented |
| Whether trial counsel was ineffective for failing to litigate the suppression motion prior to plea | Conn argues counsel's failure deprived him of a meritorious suppression ruling and proper advice about pleading | Counsel filed the suppression motion; no new evidence shows counsel acted unreasonably | Court: claims are meritless or procedurally barred; insufficient operative facts outside the record to prove ineffective assistance |
| Whether Conn was entitled to an evidentiary hearing on his petition | Conn asserts factual claims (via affidavit) about police misconduct warrant a hearing | State: affidavit is self-serving; record and filings do not mandate a hearing under R.C. 2953.21(C) | Court: no hearing required; petition, affidavits, and record did not show sufficient operative facts to warrant one |
| Whether Conn showed prejudice from counsel's alleged errors (prejudice prong of Strickland) | Conn claims he would not have pled guilty had counsel pursued suppression | State: no guarantee suppression would succeed; Conn never denied factual guilt; plea dismissed many charges — no reasonable probability he would have gone to trial | Court: Conn failed to show a reasonable probability he would have rejected the plea and insisted on trial; no prejudice shown |
Key Cases Cited
- Calhoun v. United States, 86 Ohio St.3d 279 (Ohio 1999) (standards for denying postconviction petitions without an evidentiary hearing)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (two-prong ineffective assistance of counsel test)
- State v. Jackson, 64 Ohio St.2d 107 (Ohio 1980) (petitioner bears initial burden to submit evidentiary documents showing ineffective assistance and prejudice)