State v. Leonhart
2014 Ohio 5601
Ohio Ct. App.2014Background
- Leonhart pleaded guilty to aggravated murder with firearm and forfeiture specs, aggravated burglary, and felonious assault; trial court imposed consecutive life terms with parole eligibility after 52 years and ordered costs.
- Judgment entries were initially incomplete, omitting restitution and kidnapping dismissal, leading to dismissal of his first appeal for lack of final appealable order.
- Leonhart filed postsentence motions to withdraw his guilty pleas after sentencing but before journalization of an amended entry; trial court denied.
- Amended sentencing entry later specified restitution to a victim and dismissed the kidnapping charge; the court noted indigence and appointed counsel for appeal.
- Leonhart argued his pleas were not valid due to mental illness, lack of proper Crim.R. 11 advisements, and defense counsel’s alleged misrepresentations about his sentence; the appellate court reviewed for manifest injustice and proper advisement.
- Trial court ultimately affirmed most rulings but sustained errors regarding costs and restitution, and remanded for ruling on the costs and for restitution in appropriate form?
- The court resolved that the postsentence motions to withdraw pleas were denied on the merits; costs and restitution issues were remanded for proper handling.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Motions to withdraw guilty pleas—standard | State—motions treated as postsentence; manifest injustice standard governs. | Leonhart—motions were pre-journalization presentence and should receive liberal review. | Motions are postsentence; no manifest injustice; denial affirmed. |
| Validity of guilty plea—Crim.R. 11 compliance | State—plea advisements satisfied; defendant understood rights and max penalties. | Leonhart—mental illness and lack of complete advisement undermine validity. | Plea valid; Crim.R. 11 satisfied; no manifest injustice. |
| Allied offenses merger—aggravated burglary and felonious assault | State—no same conduct or same animus against same victim for merger. | Leonhart—victim overlap justifies merger. | No error; no plain error; offenses not allied. |
| Consecutive and maximum sentences under 2929.14(C) | State—findings supported by record; consecutive terms warranted. | Leonhart—sentences and max terms excessive given mental illness. | Record supports consecutive sentences; not contrary to law; not cruel and unusual. |
| Costs and restitution—open court determination; indigency | State—costs and restitution valid; restitution amount noted in entry. | Leonhart—costs should be waived; restitution amount not set in open court. | Costs reversed/remanded for ruling on waiver; restitution amount must be set in open court; remanded. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Boswell, 121 Ohio St.3d 575 (2009-Ohio-1577) (void sentence under post-release-control error; affects Crim.R. 32.1 treatment)
- State v. Fischer, 128 Ohio St.3d 92 (2010-Ohio-6238) (post-release control error; remedy limited to affected portion)
- State v. Perkins, 2014-Ohio-1863 (2d Dist. Montgomery No. 25808) (when restitution issue not final, may still affect final judgment; not pre-sentence withdrawal)
- State v. Langenkamp, 3d Dist. Shelby Nos. 17-08-03 and 17-08-04, 2008-Ohio-5308 (2008-Ohio-5308) (manifest injustice standard for post-sentence withdrawal depends on counsel’s sentencing advice)
- State v. Hall, 2003-Ohio-6939 (10th Dist. Franklin No. 03AP-433) (withdrawal standard; significance of timely Crim.R. 32.1 motions)