State v. McBride, 2017 Ohio 4281

Background

Christopher McBride pleaded guilty in 2003 to multiple counts across two Mahoning County cases (burglary, three aggravated burglaries with firearm specifications, and two robberies in one case; aggravated burglary and robbery in the other) and received an aggregate 28-year sentence, consecutive to another sentence.
McBride did not file a direct appeal from the 2003 convictions and sentence.
He filed three post‑sentence motions to withdraw his guilty pleas (2005, 2010, 2015); each was denied by the trial court.
Appellate counsel filed an Anders/Toney no‑merit brief and moved to withdraw, identifying a possible issue about medication affecting voluntariness but concluding it was frivolous.
McBride filed a pro se brief arguing the trial court failed to advise him about allied‑offense/merger issues under R.C. 2941.25 and thus his pleas were not knowing/voluntary.
The Seventh District affirmed denial of the 2015 post‑sentence motion, granted counsel leave to withdraw, and held the appeal is barred by res judicata and, on the merits, no appealable error exists.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether res judicata bars this successive post‑sentence motion to withdraw plea	State: successive post‑sentence motions and failure to appeal earlier rulings preclude relitigation	McBride: plea involuntary because court did not advise on allied offenses/merger	Held: res judicata bars the claim; successive motions and failure to appeal preclude relief
Whether plea was knowing/voluntary due to medication or impairment at plea hearing	State: record shows Crim.R. 11 compliance and no evidence of impairment	McBride: medications/condition affected his capacity to plead knowingly	Held: record shows strict Crim.R. 11 compliance; no indicia of impairment; issue not raised earlier and lacks merit
Whether trial court erred in failing to merge allied offenses under R.C. 2941.25 at sentencing	State: merger issue was not preserved and, where not raised/found, separate sentences are not contrary to law	McBride: some counts were allied and should have merged, invalidating multiple sentences	Held: sentencing transcript shows counsel waived merger for counts with separate victims; court made no merger finding and separate sentences were lawful; any error forfeited and barred by res judicata
Whether appellate counsel properly moved to withdraw under Anders/Toney	State: counsel reviewed record and found no meritorious issues; court must independently review	McBride: (did not contest procedure)	Held: court independently reviewed record, found appeal frivolous, granted counsel leave to withdraw

Key Cases Cited

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967) (procedure when appointed counsel seeks to withdraw on grounds appeal is frivolous)
State v. Toney, 23 Ohio App.2d 203 (Ohio Ct. App. 1970) (local procedure for no‑merit briefs and appellant notice)
State v. Xie, 62 Ohio St.3d 521 (Ohio 1992) (standard for trial court review of post‑sentence motion to withdraw guilty plea)
State v. Adams, 62 Ohio St.2d 151 (Ohio 1980) (abuse of discretion standard)
State v. Smith, 49 Ohio St.2d 261 (Ohio 1977) (burden on movant to show manifest injustice for post‑sentence plea withdrawal)
State v. Ketterer, 126 Ohio St.3d 448 (Ohio 2010) (res judicata bars claims that were or could have been raised earlier)
State v. Whitfield, 124 Ohio St.3d 319 (Ohio 2010) (R.C. 2941.25 protects against multiple sentences for allied offenses)
State v. Ruff, 143 Ohio St.3d 114 (Ohio 2015) (test for allied offenses: separate harm, separate conduct, or separate animus)
State v. Marcum, 146 Ohio St.3d 516 (Ohio 2016) (standard for appellate review of felony sentences)
State v. Rogers, 143 Ohio St.3d 385 (Ohio 2015) (forfeiture/plain‑error framework for allied‑offense objections)
State v. Williams, 148 Ohio St.3d 403 (Ohio 2016) (imposition of separate sentences without merging not contrary to law absent a merger finding)