State v. McGee, 2022 Ohio 2045

Devin McGee was indicted in two Cuyahoga County cases for multiple sexual and weapons-related offenses and entered a plea agreement on Sept. 15, 2021, pleading guilty to reduced charges.
At the plea colloquy McGee acknowledged understanding maximum penalties and stated he was satisfied with his counsel; remaining charges were nolled as part of the plea.
Seven days before sentencing McGee filed a pro se motion to discharge counsel and, at an Oct. 18 hearing, orally moved to withdraw his plea, claiming poor communication and that he had entered a "blind plea."
The trial court denied the motion to discharge counsel and the pre-sentence motion to withdraw the plea, held a sentencing hearing with victim impact evidence, and imposed consecutive terms totaling 17 years, 6 months (including an 18-month weapons sentence consecutive).
McGee appealed, raising four assignments of error: denial of motion to discharge counsel; ineffective assistance for counsel’s failure to file a written pre-sentence withdrawal motion; denial of motion to withdraw plea; and imposition of consecutive sentences.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (McGee)	Held
Whether trial court erred in denying motion to discharge counsel	Motion untimely and based on vague, nonspecific complaints; court properly inquired	Counsel failed to communicate; McGee had replacement counsel ready and was denied effective counsel	Denial affirmed — no abuse of discretion; complaints were general and contradicted by plea record
Whether trial court erred in denying pre-sentence motion to withdraw plea	Motion lacked reasonable and legitimate basis; plea was knowing and voluntary	Plea was "blind" and entered without adequate counsel communication; McGee sought to withdraw before sentencing	Denial affirmed — trial court properly exercised discretion under Crim.R. 32.1 and Xie factors
Whether counsel was ineffective for failing to file written pre-sentence withdrawal motion	No prejudice — court would not have granted motion; counsel obtained favorable plea	Counsel’s failure to file deprived McGee of opportunity to have motion fully considered	Denied — Strickland standard not met; no reasonable probability outcome would differ
Whether consecutive sentences were lawful	Court made required R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) findings on the record; sentences proportional and necessary	Consecutive sentences disproportionate and unsupported by record	Affirmed — court articulated findings (necessity, proportionality, harm so great/unusual) supported by record

State v. Xie, 62 Ohio St.3d 521 (1992) (standards for pre-sentence withdrawal of pleas)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
State v. Coleman, 37 Ohio St.3d 286 (1988) (breakdown in attorney-client relationship must jeopardize effective assistance)
State v. Cowans, 87 Ohio St.3d 68 (1999) (abuse-of-discretion review for substitution/discharge of appointed counsel)
United States v. Mack, 258 F.3d 548 (6th Cir. 2001) (factors for evaluating motions to withdraw or substitute counsel)
State v. Bonnell, 140 Ohio St.3d 209 (2014) (requirement to make and incorporate consecutive-sentence findings)
Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (1983) (definition of abuse of discretion)
State v. Peterseim, 68 Ohio App.2d 211 (1981) (factors for denying pre-sentence plea-withdrawal motions)