State v. Hall
2017 Ohio 813
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- In 2007 Hall pled guilty to two counts of aggravated robbery and one count of felonious assault, receiving a total 19-year sentence.
- On remand after appellate vacatur, a new judge resentenced Hall to nine-year concurrent terms for Counts 3 and 6, a three-year gun specification, and an eight-year Count 14, totaling 20 years.
- Appellate remand decisions were affirmed by this court in 2009 (State v. Hall, 10th Dist. No. 09AP-302).
- In January 2016 Hall moved to vacate the resentencing entry for not imposing a sentence on all convictions and to withdraw his guilty plea.
- The trial court denied the motions on res judicata grounds and for lack of a manifest injustice, prompting an Anders review on appeal.
- The appellate court affirmed, concluding no nonfrivolous issues remained and that the orders were proper.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Denial of motion to vacate sentence | Hall contends the resentencing entry is interlocutory for missing a sentence on a count. | State argues a sentence on all counts exists and merger issues are barred by res judicata. | Denial affirmed; sentences imposed and merger claim barred by res judicata. |
| Denial of motion to withdraw plea under Crim.R.11 | Hall claims the plea was not accepted with full Crim.R.11 compliance (mandatory term/limits). | State notes Hall was informed of mandatory term and ineligible for community control; not void. | Denial affirmed; Crim.R.11 claim barred by res judicata; Hall was informed of mandatory term. |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967) (counsel may withdraw if appeal frivolous after review)
- State v. Lowe, 10th Dist. No. 14AP-481, 2015-Ohio-382 (Ohio 2015) (res judicata bars claims not raised on direct appeal)
- State v. Britford, 10th Dist. No. 11AP-646, 2012-Ohio-1966 (Ohio 2012) (res judicata applies to post-sentence withdrawal claims)
- Ishmail, 67 Ohio St.2d 16, 421 N.E.2d 1038 (Ohio 1981) (Crim.R.11 and post-conviction issues require direct appeal timing)
- State v. Muhammad, 10th Dist. No. 12AP-906, 2013-Ohio-2776 (Ohio 2013) (independent review after Anders; no meritorious issues found)