State v. Deskins, 2011 Ohio 2605

Deskins was indicted in 2002 on one count of rape with a sexually violent predator specification and four counts of rape for acts with his daughter aged 7–11 between 1993 and 1997.
He pleaded guilty in 2003; the SVP specification was dismissed; the court sentenced him to five years on each count, consecutive for an aggregate 25 years.
In 2009–2010, Deskins moved for resentencing and to withdraw his guilty plea; the trial court denied withdrawal and granted resentencing.
At resentencing, the court reimposed the original sentence and properly imposed postrelease control, which is mandatory for the offenses.
Deskins timely appealed, challenging withdrawal of the plea, jurisdiction to impose postrelease control, and related consequences.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court abused its discretion by denying the motion to withdraw the guilty plea.	Deskins argues the letter from the victim warranted withdrawal.	Court failed to consider the victim letter in ruling.	No abuse of discretion; denial upheld.
Whether the court had jurisdiction to impose postrelease control at resentencing.	Deskins claims resentence cannot impose PRC because counts may have expired.	Aggregate sentence kept him within jurisdiction to resentence.	Court had jurisdiction to resentence to impose postrelease control.
Whether separate postrelease-control provisions were required for each conviction.	Deskins claims equal protection/due process require separate PRC terms.	Maag and related authority permit one PRC term for multiple convictions with identical terms.	Not error; one PRC term applies to multiple offenses.
Whether the convictions on counts 1–5 were supported by sufficient evidence or were against the weight of the evidence (and related consequences due to the guilty plea).	Deskins challenges factual guilt post-plea.	Guilty plea admits factual guilt; issues not properly before court.	Not addressed due to guilty plea; issues barred by res judicata.

State v. Fischer, 128 Ohio St.3d 92 (2010-Ohio-6238) (postrelease control in a void portion of the sentence; proper remedy upon failure to impose PRC)
State v. Xie, 62 Ohio St.3d 521 (1992) (abuse of discretion standard for withdrawal of guilty plea)
State v. Bezak, 114 Ohio St.3d 94 (2007-Ohio-3250) (limits on resentencing when PRC terms apply and when not to re-sentence)
State v. Simpkins, 117 Ohio St.3d 420 (2008-Ohio-1197) (postrelease control generally requires resentencing unless the defendant completed term)
State v. Bloomer, 122 Ohio St.3d 200 (2009-Ohio-2462) (reaffirmed timelines for PRC consideration in resentencing)