2017 Ohio 1513
Ohio Ct. App.2017Background
- In Aug. 2005 Lusane was stopped in Ravenna and cited for OVI and three other traffic offenses in Ravenna Municipal Court.
- Within a week he was stopped in Kent and pleaded no contest to a separate OVI in Kent Municipal Court on Dec. 5, 2005; Kent court sentenced him to 30 days jail.
- On Dec. 27, 2005 the Ravenna court docket jacket recorded a guilty plea to the Ravenna OVI and a separate Ravenna sentencing entry imposed 30 days jail, license suspension, and fines; the Ravenna entries did not reference the Kent case.
- Lusane did not appeal the Ravenna conviction and waited six years to file a petition for postconviction relief claiming the Ravenna plea was invalid because the Kent plea agreement had purportedly included dismissal of the Ravenna charges and because no Crim.R. 11 colloquy occurred in Ravenna.
- The trial court denied the postconviction petition as untimely (this court affirmed); years later Lusane filed a Crim.R. 32.1 motion to withdraw his guilty plea raising the same Crim.R. 11 defect; the trial court denied the motion solely on res judicata grounds.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether res judicata bars a Crim.R. 32.1 motion to withdraw a plea alleging failure to comply with Crim.R. 11 | State: res judicata applies to claims that were or could have been raised on direct appeal, so it bars this collateral attack | Lusane: his motion challenges the voluntariness/validity of the plea (no Crim.R. 11 colloquy) and is a proper first challenge to the plea | The court held res judicata bars the motion because the Crim.R. 11 compliance could have been raised on direct appeal |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Szefcyk, 77 Ohio St.3d 93 (1996) (establishes that a final conviction bars raising defenses or due-process claims in later proceedings that were or could have been raised on direct appeal)