State v. Feathers, 2021 Ohio 4137

Nov. 4, 2004 indictment charged Feathers with aggravated burglary (1st deg.), felonious assault (2nd deg.), and domestic violence (originally felony-level). He was convicted at trial.
This court reversed those convictions on appeal due to evidentiary error and remanded for a new trial.
A Jan. 31, 2008 amended indictment changed Domestic Violence to a 4th-degree felony; Feathers pleaded guilty on May 28, 2008 and received consecutive prison terms.
Feathers obtained judicial release in 2015, but the release was revoked and he was ordered to serve the remainder of his sentence in 2019.
On Dec. 14, 2020 Feathers moved to withdraw his guilty plea, arguing the indictment was void (improper joinder/severance, grand jury misinformation, prosecutorial misconduct).
The trial court denied the motion; Feathers appealed, challenging whether his plea was intelligent/voluntary given the alleged invalid indictment.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Feathers can withdraw his guilty plea post-sentence based on alleged defects in the indictment (joinder/severance, grand jury errors, prosecutorial misconduct)	State: plea-postconviction withdrawal is disfavored; claims were or could have been raised earlier and are barred by res judicata; indictment was valid or at most voidable	Feathers: indictment was void (due to improper joinder and false/misleading grand jury presentation), so plea was invalid and withdrawal warranted	Court affirmed denial: Crim.R. 32.1 relief requires manifest injustice; Feathers did not meet burden; issues waived/res judicata applies; indictment not void
Whether res judicata is inapplicable because the indictment was void	State: res judicata bars claims that were or could have been raised earlier because the indictment was not void	Feathers: indictment was void so res judicata should not bar his challenge	Court: indictment was voidable, not void; subject-matter jurisdiction existed; res judicata applies and bars these claims

State v. Smith, 49 Ohio St.2d 261, 361 N.E.2d 1324 (1977) (defendant bears burden to show manifest injustice for post‑sentence plea withdrawal)
State v. Carabello, 17 Ohio St.3d 66, 477 N.E.2d 627 (1985) (Crim.R. 32.1 reviewed for abuse of discretion)
State v. Ketterer, 126 Ohio St.3d 448, 935 N.E.2d 9 (2010) (res judicata bars claims that were or could have been raised on direct appeal)
State v. Perry, 10 Ohio St.2d 175, 226 N.E.2d 104 (1967) (traditional Ohio res judicata rule in criminal cases)
State v. Cimpritz, 158 Ohio St. 490, 110 N.E.2d 416 (1953) (conviction based on an indictment that does not charge an offense is void)
Brinkman v. Drolesbaugh, 97 Ohio St. 171, 119 N.E. 451 (1918) (definition of a void indictment vs. voidable indictment)
State ex rel. Rackley v. Sloan, 150 Ohio St.3d 11, 78 N.E.3d 819 (2016) (challenges to indictment validity or sufficiency are nonjurisdictional and generally do not deprive court of subject‑matter jurisdiction)