State v. Jones, 2011 Ohio 2903

Defendant Charles Jones pled guilty to murder and felonious assault with accompanying firearm specifications under a plea agreement.
The state dismissed the attempted murder charge and agreed concurrent sentences on remaining charges, with murder set at 15 years to life and felonious assault at eight years, to run consecutive to a gun specification.
The plea occurred after extensive pretrial delays and multiple continuances, including polygraph testing ordered by the court.
Defendant moved to withdraw the guilty plea pre-sentencing alleging discovery information was not shared and that he was coerced, but the court overruled the motion.
Sentencing occurred on March 3, 2009, after which the defendant timely appealed challenging the ruling on withdrawal and alleging ineffective assistance of counsel.
Appellate review focuses on whether the presentence withdrawal of a guilty plea was properly denied and whether counsel’s representation was deficient.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Pre-sentencing withdrawal of plea standard	Jones argues trial court abused discretion in denying withdrawal.	Jones claims undisclosed discovery and coercion justify withdrawal.	No abuse of discretion; Fish factors do not weigh in his favor.
Effectiveness of counsel	Jones asserts ineffective assistance due to failure to share discovery and coercion.	Counsel actively represented him; plea was knowingly entered.	No reversible ineffective assistance; actions were reasonable under Strickland standards.

State v. Xie, 62 Ohio St.3d 521 (Ohio 1992) (presentence withdrawal standard and factors for review)
State v. Cuthbertson, 139 Ohio App.3d 895 (Ohio 2000) (guides consideration of presentence withdrawal factors)
State v. Fish, 104 Ohio App.3d 236 (Ohio 1995) (non-conclusive Fish factors for withdrawal analysis)