State v. Easter
2016 Ohio 7798
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Larry W. Easter was indicted on four first-degree rape counts with specifications (victim under 10); under a plea deal he pled guilty to one count with the specification removed. Parties agreed to sentence of 10 years to life.
- Plea form and the court colloquy show Easter waived constitutional rights, acknowledged the plea, and that he was satisfied with counsel; court accepted the plea and scheduled sentencing.
- At sentencing the court imposed an indefinite life term with a 10-year minimum, designated Easter a Tier III sex offender, and assessed court costs; the court orally stated there was "no post-release control" for a 10-to-life sentence but also advised parole supervision if released.
- The final judgment entry ordered Easter to pay court-appointed counsel fees and other costs without any on-the-record finding about his ability to pay.
- Easter appealed, arguing (1) his guilty plea was not knowing/voluntary because he was misinformed about post-release control, and (2) the court erred by ordering payment of appointed-counsel fees without assessing ability to pay.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Easter) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether plea was knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily given where court misstated post-release control | Court substantially complied with Crim.R.11; any error about post-release control is a correctable sentencing error and does not void plea | Plea is invalid because misinformation about post-release control at plea/sentencing was constitutional error that prejudiced his plea | Court: Plea was knowing, intelligent, voluntary; misinformation about post-release control does not show prejudice sufficient to void plea, but sentencing must be corrected on remand to impose post-release control properly |
| Whether trial court could order payment of court-appointed counsel fees without finding defendant's ability to pay | State concedes error — fees require ability-to-pay finding and notice | Fees unlawful because no ability-to-pay finding or notice at sentencing | Court: Trial court erred; order to pay appointed-counsel fees vacated and reversed |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Barker, 129 Ohio St.3d 472 (Ohio 2011) (Crim.R. 11 requires courts to ensure pleas are knowing, intelligent, and voluntary)
- State v. Veney, 120 Ohio St.3d 176 (Ohio 2008) (substantial compliance standard for non-constitutional Crim.R. 11 warnings; prejudice required to vacate plea)
- State v. Spates, 64 Ohio St.3d 269 (Ohio 1992) (review record to ensure trial court followed Crim.R. 11 upon guilty plea)
- State ex rel. Carnail v. McCormick, 126 Ohio St.3d 124 (Ohio 2010) (post-release control for life/indefinite sentences not expressly exempted; obligations must be imposed consistent with statute)
- State v. Fischer, 128 Ohio St.3d 92 (Ohio 2010) (sentencing errors concerning post-release control can be corrected by limited resentencing)
- State v. Clark, 119 Ohio St.3d 239 (Ohio 2008) (partial Crim.R. 11 compliance requires showing of prejudice to vacate plea)