State v. Furr
2014 Ohio 1319
Ohio Ct. App.2014Background
- Appellant Kono R. Furr was indicted for burglary (2nd-degree) and possessing criminal tools; he pleaded guilty pursuant to a plea agreement to an amended third-degree burglary and was sentenced to three years' imprisonment.
- Less than a month after sentencing, Furr filed a postsentence motion to withdraw his guilty plea alleging counsel promised probation, ignored his request to withdraw the plea, and failed to explain sentencing exposure.
- While that motion was pending, Furr filed a pro se notice of appeal to the Twelfth District; the state moved to strike his appellate brief arguing the trial court had not ruled and jurisdiction was divested.
- The Twelfth District struck Furr’s brief and dismissed the appeal as premature (Furr I), and Furr’s request for reconsideration was denied. The trial court later denied his motion to withdraw the plea, citing res judicata and lack of jurisdiction.
- On appeal from the trial court’s denial, the Twelfth District reversed: it held the trial court had regained jurisdiction after the appellate dismissal and that res judicata did not bar Furr’s motion because his claims required evidence dehors the record.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court lacked jurisdiction to rule on the postsentence motion after the appellate filing | State: trial court divested of jurisdiction when Furr filed notice of appeal and did not regain jurisdiction after dismissal | Furr: trial court regained jurisdiction after this court dismissed the appeal and could rule on the pending motion | Court: trial court was temporarily divested but regained jurisdiction after this court dismissed the appeal; trial court erred in concluding it lacked jurisdiction |
| Whether res judicata barred Furr’s motion to withdraw his guilty plea | State: res judicata should apply because Furr could have raised ineffective-assistance or related claims on direct appeal | Furr: res judicata does not apply because (1) no decision on the motion was ever issued on the merits and (2) key claims require evidence outside the record | Court: res judicata did not apply — no prior adjudication on the motion and claims alleging counsel’s promises and failures require evidence dehors the record, so the motion could not have been fully raised on direct appeal |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Neff v. Corrigan, 75 Ohio St.3d 12 (1996) (trial court regains jurisdiction after dismissal of appeal)
- State ex rel. Newton v. Court of Claims, 73 Ohio St.3d 553 (1995) (dismissal of appeal restores trial court authority to decide pending motions)
- State v. Saxon, 109 Ohio St.3d 176 (2006) (res judicata bars claims that were or could have been raised on direct appeal)
- State v. Perry, 10 Ohio St.2d 175 (1967) (authoritative statement of res judicata in criminal cases)
- State ex rel. Special Prosecutors v. Judges, 55 Ohio St.2d 94 (1978) (jurisdictional principles regarding trial court authority during appeals)