State v. Holly
2011 Ohio 2284
Ohio Ct. App.2011Background
- Holly was indicted on five counts: two felonious assault, kidnapping, domestic violence, and violating a protective order.
- The alleged incident involved Holly ramming his wife’s vehicle, entering the van, grabbing her hair, and punching her multiple times.
- Holly pled guilty to a single felonious assault count (second degree felony) and misdemeanor domestic violence and violation of a protective order; other counts were dismissed.
- The trial court sentenced Holly to six years in prison, restitution, and a permanent no-contact order with the victim; postrelease control of three years was also imposed.
- Two days after sentencing, Holly, pro se, moved to withdraw his plea and sought appellate counsel; the trial court denied withdrawal but appointed appellate counsel.
- Holly appeals arguing (1) the plea was not voluntary because it was conditioned on a TASC evaluation that never occurred, and (2) the sentence improperly included an indefinite no-contact order and was otherwise unlawful.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was the plea knowingly and intelligently entered? | Holly contends plea conditioned on TASC evaluation. | Holly asserts lack of promised/occurring TASC evaluation taints voluntariness. | Plea voluntary; no evidence of conditioning or failed TASC evaluation; Crim.R.11 satisfied. |
| Is the sentence lawful given the no-contact provision? | No-contact order improper after prison term; voids entire sentence. | No-contact may be imposed under law; remaining sentence valid. | No-contact provision vacated; remainder of sentence affirmed; remanded to remove indefinite no-contact order. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Ballard, 66 Ohio St.2d 473 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1981) (Crim.R. 11 conformity standard for plea voluntariness)
- State v. Stewart, 51 Ohio St.2d 86 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1977) (voluntariness and capacity considerations for pleas)
- State v. Fischer, 128 Ohio St.3d 92 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2010) (unlawful portion of sentence vacated; partial correction permitted)
- State v. Bruno, 8th Dist. No. 77202 (2001) (no-contact sanctions context in sentencing)
- State v. Muldrew, 8th Dist. No. 85661 (2005) (timeliness of direct-appeal defects; bootstrapping concerns)