State v. Graham
2013 Ohio 600
Ohio Ct. App.2013Background
- Appellant Graham pled guilty to one count of breaking and entering on Sept. 15, 2011 under a plea agreement that the State would remain silent at sentencing.
- At the Dec. 15, 2011 sentencing, the prosecutor spoke against the terms of the plea agreement by arguing for a prison sentence.
- The court sentenced Graham to 11 months to be served consecutively with another sentence.
- Graham moved to withdraw his guilty plea on June 7, 2012; the trial court denied the motion on Oct. 30, 2012.
- The appellate court, on accelerated review, sustained the first assignment of error and reversed, remanding for a new sentencing hearing before a different judge under Santobello v. New York.
- The case is reviewed under App. R. 11.1 accelerated calendar procedures.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does Santobello require a new sentencing hearing or withdrawal of the plea due to the State’s breach? | Santobello requires specific performance or withdrawal. | Breach occurred but withdrawal not appropriate; possible remedy is different outcome via new sentencing. | Entitled to a new sentencing hearing before a different judge. |
| Was counsel ineffective for failing to object to prosecutorial comments at sentencing? | Ineffective assistance for not objecting. | Remedy unnecessary after ruling on first issue; moot. | Moot given disposition of first issue. |
Key Cases Cited
- Santobello v. New York, 404 U.S. 257 (U.S. (1971)) (prosecutor must honor promises forming part of a plea agreement; remedy may be specific performance or withdrawal)