State v. Long
2016 Ohio 671
Ohio Ct. App.2016Background
- Guy A. Long was indicted in 2011 on multiple drug, weapons, receiving stolen property, and safecracking counts arising from a no‑knock search; he later pled no contest to most counts and received an aggregate 7‑year sentence.
- Long unsuccessfully moved to suppress the search warrant evidence before plea; his direct appeal challenging the warrant was affirmed.
- Over several years Long filed numerous post‑conviction and collateral motions (motions to withdraw plea, motions alleging due‑process violations, habeas, breach of plea bargain, and motions for resentencing); these were repeatedly denied and appellate courts affirmed.
- In October 2015 Long filed another Crim.R. 32.1 motion to withdraw his no‑contest plea, alleging a police grand jury statement falsely said drugs were found on him when patted down (contradicted by inventory/photos showing drugs in the basement). He did not attach the alleged statement.
- The trial court overruled the motion as it lacked jurisdiction to grant a post‑sentence withdrawal after the conviction had been affirmed on appeal. The court also found no manifest injustice shown.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court had jurisdiction to grant a post‑sentence Crim.R. 32.1 withdrawal after appellate affirmance | State: Trial court lacked jurisdiction to vacate a plea after appellate affirmance | Long: Trial court should be able to consider and grant withdrawal based on new evidence of false grand jury statement | Court: No jurisdiction to vacate plea once conviction affirmed on appeal; denial affirmed |
| Whether Long showed "manifest injustice" to permit post‑sentence withdrawal under Crim.R. 32.1 | State: Long failed to show extraordinary circumstances or provide the alleged statement; no manifest injustice | Long: Alleged false/untrue grand jury statement by Sgt. Carroll (drugs said found on person) conflicts with inventory/photos showing basement discovery; pursuit of plea withdrawal justified | Court: Long failed to present the alleged statement or otherwise demonstrate a manifest injustice; motion properly denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Special Prosecutors v. Judges, Belmont County Court of Common Pleas, 55 Ohio St.2d 94, 378 N.E.2d 162 (1978) (trial court cannot vacate a judgment affirmed on appeal)
- State v. Ketterer, 126 Ohio St.3d 448, 935 N.E.2d 9 (2010) (same principle regarding trial court jurisdiction after appellate review)
- State v. Smith, 49 Ohio St.2d 261, 361 N.E.2d 1324 (1977) (post‑sentence withdrawal requires showing of manifest injustice)
- State v. Carabello, 17 Ohio St.3d 66, 477 N.E.2d 627 (1985) (abuse‑of‑discretion standard for denial of withdrawal motion)
- Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217, 450 N.E.2d 1140 (1983) (standard defining abuse of discretion)