State v. McCann, 2013 Ohio 2992

In 2009 Floyd McCann fired a .22 rifle from his porch; a bullet struck Mark Robinson, leaving him paralyzed. McCann was indicted for felonious assault with a firearm specification and having weapons under disability; he later entered an Alford plea to felonious assault in exchange for dismissals and community-control relief.
The trial court accepted the Alford plea, sentenced McCann to 10 years, and McCann appealed; this court previously affirmed the conviction but later reopened limitedly to correct post-release-control language on remand.
After remand McCann sought BCI and other investigative materials via a public-records request and then filed a Crim.R. 32.1-based post-sentence motion to invalidate his plea, alleging undisclosed exculpatory evidence (data collection, photos, trajectory measurements).
The trial court denied the public-records request (McCann’s appeal on that was dismissed as untimely) and denied the motion to withdraw the plea without a hearing, noting a defendant cannot litigate claims indefinitely.
McCann appealed the denial of his motion to withdraw his guilty plea, arguing (1) the plea should be withdrawn because potentially exculpatory evidence was not disclosed and (2) the court abused its discretion by not holding a hearing.
The appellate court affirmed, concluding McCann’s arguments were barred by res judicata because the issues could have been raised on direct appeal and the contested materials were discoverable before his plea.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (McCann)	Held
Whether the trial court erred in denying a post-sentence motion to withdraw plea based on alleged undisclosed exculpatory evidence	Trial court: motion is barred by res judicata; pleadings governed by Crim.R. 32.1 and prior appeal resolved plea validity	McCann: material exculpatory evidence (BCI data, photos, trajectory measurements) was not disclosed and would show manifest injustice warranting withdrawal	Court: Denied — res judicata bars the claim because evidence was discoverable pre-plea and issues could have been raised on direct appeal
Whether the trial court abused its discretion by not holding an evidentiary hearing on the Crim.R. 32.1 motion	Trial court: hearing not required where motion is legally barred and facts do not show manifest injustice	McCann: factual allegations of undisclosed exculpatory evidence justified an evidentiary hearing	Court: Denied — no hearing required because res judicata forecloses merits and alleged facts did not obligate a hearing

State v. Xie, 62 Ohio St.3d 521 (sets abuse-of-discretion standard for post-sentence plea withdrawals)
State v. Lessin, 67 Ohio St.3d 487 (discusses abuse-of-discretion scope)
Rock v. Cabral, 67 Ohio St.3d 108 (definition of abuse of discretion)
State v. Jenkins, 15 Ohio St.3d 164 (abuse-of-discretion explained)
Huffman v. Hair Surgeon, Inc., 19 Ohio St.3d 83 (abuse-of-discretion framework)
State v. Bush, 96 Ohio St.3d 235 (Crim.R. 32.1 motions not governed by R.C. 2953.21 post-conviction statutes)
State v. Schlee, 117 Ohio St.3d 153 (Crim.R. 32.1 motions may not be recast as petitions for post-conviction relief)
State v. Saxon, 109 Ohio St.3d 176 (res judicata bars claims that were or could have been raised on direct appeal)