State v. Layne, 2012 Ohio 1627

Appellant pled guilty to attempted gross sexual imposition and importuning in exchange for dismissal of two related charges.
State agreed to recommend five years’ incarceration; sentencing ran one year for the first count and four years for the second, consecutive.
No request to treat the offenses as allied offenses of similar import was raised at plea or sentencing.
Approximately 21 months later, Appellant moved to withdraw his guilty pleas; motion was denied.
Appellant argued the two offenses were allied offenses of similar import and thus consecutive sentences were improper.
The court applied Crim.R. 32.1 standards, reviewed for manifest injustice and plain error, and affirmed the denial of withdrawal and the sentencing judgment.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether consecutive sentences on allied offenses were proper	Layne argues the offenses are allied offenses of similar import	Layne did not raise allied-offense issue at trial; Johnson not controlling; no manifest injustice	Not an abuse of discretion; offenses not allied; no manifest injustice.

State v. Smith, 49 Ohio St.2d 261 (1977) (manifest injustice standard for Crim.R. 32.1)
State v. Xie, 62 Ohio St.3d 521 (1992) (abuse-of-discretion review for post-sentence withdrawal)
State v. Thrower, 62 Ohio App.3d 359 (1989) (plain-error review when allied-offense issue not raised)
State v. Johnson, 128 Ohio St.3d 153 (2010) (two-step allied-offense framework; retroactivity considerations)
State v. Cabrales, 118 Ohio St.3d 54 (2008) (elements-based test for allied offenses; similar import)
State v. Winn, 121 Ohio St.3d 413 (2009) (elements-based analysis; similar import not identical)
State v. Pigge, 2010-Ohio-6541 (2010) (two-step method for allied offenses under 2941.25)
State v. Harris, 122 Ohio St.3d 373 (2009) (cabrales/winn framework applying to allied offenses)
State v. Rance, 85 Ohio St.3d 632 (1999) (predecessor to Cabrales/Winn; abstract element comparison)