State v. Francis, 8 N.E.3d 371

Francis pled guilty to four counts of rape in 2012; age specifications were dismissed.
Plea documents stated maximum terms as life imprisonment and a mandatory term; sentencing imposed ten years on each count.
Sentences: counts 1–2 concurrent, counts 3–4 concurrent, but 3–4 consecutive to 1–2, yielding a minimum 20-year term.
Francis filed a notice of appeal which the appellate court dismissed as untimely; a delayed appeal was denied.
Francis filed a postconviction relief petition alleging ineffective assistance: sentencing information provided to him and failure to timely file an appeal; affidavits were attached.
Trial court denied PCR, citing lack of jurisdiction over appellate timing and lack of substantive grounds; no evidentiary hearing was held.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Ineffective assistance from erroneous sentencing information	Francis claims counsel promised a flat 10-year sentence	State argues no firm promise; record shows different circumstances	No abuse of discretion; sentencing-info claim denied.
Ineffective assistance for failing to file a timely notice of appeal	Counsel failed to file timely notice per Flores-Ortega	Trial court lacked jurisdiction to address appeal timing	Remanded to consider the claim on its merits.

State v. Calhoun, 86 Ohio St.3d 279 (1999) (gatekeeping/credibility of affidavits; abuse-of-discretion standard when no hearing)
State v. Gondor, 112 Ohio St.3d 377 (2006) (abuse-of-discretion standard for summary denial without hearing in postconviction)
State v. White, 118 Ohio St.3d 12 (2008) (Affirmed Gondor, abuse-of-discretion standard applies)
State v. Harrington, 172 Ohio App.3d 595 (2007) (mixed review where no hearing; favors abuse-of-discretion approach)
State v. Williams, 2008-Ohio-3257 (8th Dist.) (discussed de novo vs. abuse-of-discretion in PCR context)
Roe v. Flores-Ortega, 528 U.S. 470 (2000) (unfiled appeal by counsel is objectively unreasonable; ministerial task to file notice)