State v. Corbin
2011 Ohio 6628
Ohio Ct. App.2011Background
- Corbin was indicted on 1 count each of aggravated burglary, kidnapping, and aggravated robbery, with firearm specifications, and 1 count of having weapons under disability.
- At arraignment, Corbin pleaded not guilty; after pretrials, he pled guilty to amended counts under a plea agreement.
- The state deleted the three-year firearm specification from aggravated burglary; Corbin pled guilty to the amended charge with a one-year firearm specification.
- Firearm specifications were removed from kidnapping and aggravated robbery; Corbin pled to those amended charges and to having weapons under disability.
- Corbin entered into a plea agreeing to an aggregate 10-year sentence; the court imposed 1 year (firearm), 9 years each for aggravated burglary, kidnapping, and aggravated robbery, and 5 years for weapons under disability, with underlying charges concurrent and consecutive to the firearm spec.
- Corbin challenged the pleas as involuntary and challenged trial counsel; the court conducted a Crim.R. 11 colloquy and denied relief.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Guilty plea knowingly, intelligently entered | Corbin | Corbin | Plea knowingly, intelligently entered |
| Duty to hold hearing on motion to disqualify counsel | Corbin | Corbin | No reversible error; record shows abandonment of motion |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel claims | Corbin | Corbin | No ineffective assistance shown; claims waived by guilty plea |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Veney, 120 Ohio St.3d 176 (2008-Ohio-5200) (strict Crim.R. 11(C)(2)(c) rights require meaningful dialogue)
- State v. Ballard, 66 Ohio St.2d 473 (1981) (plea colloquy suffices when defendant understands rights)
- State v. Cardwell, 2009-Ohio-6827 ( Ct. App. No. 92796) (de novo standard for Crim.R. 11 compliance)
- State v. Stewart, 51 Ohio St.2d 86 (1977) (requires totality-of-circumstances analysis for plea)
- State v. Nero, 56 Ohio St.3d 106 (1990) (substantial compliance doctrine for nonconstitutional rights)
- State v. Caplinger, 105 Ohio App.3d 567 (1995) (substantial compliance analysis for nonconstitutional pleac)
- State v. Hicks, 2008-Ohio-6284 (Ct. App. No. 90804) (ineffective-assistance claims waived by guilty plea)