State v. Harris
2019 Ohio 1700
Ohio Ct. App.2019Background
- Wayne Harris was indicted on three felonies for conduct on April 30, 2017, including having weapons while under disability; two other counts were later dismissed as part of a plea deal.
- On January 16, 2018, Harris pled guilty to having weapons while under disability in exchange for dismissal of the remaining counts; the trial court conducted a Crim.R. 11 plea colloquy and accepted the plea.
- On February 26, 2018 — one day before sentencing — Harris moved to withdraw his guilty plea; the trial court held a hearing on March 12, 2018.
- At the hearing defense counsel argued Harris wanted his "day in court" and cited case law; no new factual evidence of innocence or meritorious defenses was presented and no memorandum accompanied the written motion.
- The trial court denied the motion, finding a mere change of heart and potential prejudice to the state; Harris was sentenced to 36 months' imprisonment and appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Harris) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court abused its discretion in denying a presentence motion to withdraw a guilty plea | The court properly exercised discretion after considering Xie factors; plea was knowing and voluntary; withdrawal would prejudice the state | Harris argued he should be allowed to withdraw his plea to have his day in court and to contest the charges | Affirmed — no abuse of discretion; change of heart insufficient; plea and Crim.R.11 colloquy adequate |
| Whether counsel was ineffective at the motion-to-withdraw hearing | Counsel’s performance was reasonable; counsel cited law and argued at hearing despite not filing a memorandum | Harris argued counsel failed to adequately represent him and omitted a supporting memorandum | Affirmed — no deficient performance or prejudice under Strickland |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Xie, 62 Ohio St.3d 521 (establishes presentence withdrawal standard and deference to trial court on credibility)
- State v. Smith, 49 Ohio St.2d 261 (trial court resolves credibility and good-faith of movant)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (two-prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- State v. Madrigal, 87 Ohio St.3d 378 (discusses Strickland application in Ohio)
- State v. Cooperrider, 4 Ohio St.3d 226 (ineffective-assistance claims must be apparent on record or pursued postconviction)
- State v. Coleman, 85 Ohio St.3d 129 (claims based on facts not in record should be raised in postconviction proceedings)