State v. McGlosson
2013 Ohio 774
Ohio Ct. App.2013Background
- McGlosson pled guilty to two counts of gross sexual imposition on Dec 15, 2010; sentences of four and three years, consecutive, to seven-year aggregate; no direct appeal.
- On Dec 14, 2011, McGlosson moved to withdraw the plea alleging ineffective assistance and failure to suppress a confession.
- A hearing was held Feb 15, 2012; the state presented detective and defense attorney testimony; the court denied the motion.
- The trial court noted McGlosson was represented by competent counsel, had Crim.R. 11 compliance, and waited about ten months to file the motion.
- McGlosson timely appealed with two assignments of error challenging the denial of the withdrawal motion and counsel’s effectiveness.
- The appellate court reviewed for abuse of discretion and affirmed the trial court’s decision.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether post-sentence withdrawal requires manifest injustice and abuse of discretion. | McGlosson argues manifest injustice due to innocence and misunderstanding of plea. | McGlosson contends trial court abused discretion by denying withdrawal. | No abuse; no manifest injustice shown. |
| Whether ineffective-assistance claims justify withdrawal of plea. | McGlosson asserts counsel pressured plea and failed to investigate. | McGlosson argues counsel was ineffective; affidavits lack credibility. | Insufficient to establish ineffective assistance. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Degaro, 2009-Ohio-2966 (12th Dist. 2009) (post-sentence withdrawal requires manifest injustice; discretionary ruling)
- State v. Williams, 2009-Ohio-6240 (12th Dist. 2009) (manifest injustice standard for Crim.R. 32.1 motions)
- State v. Smith, 1977 (Ohio) (syllabus: manifest injustice required for post-sentence withdrawal)
- State v. McMahon, 2010-Ohio-2055 (12th Dist. 2010) (abuse-of-discretion standard; factors for withdrawal considered)
- State v. Heath, 2006-Ohio-7045 (12th Dist. 2006) (self-serving affidavits insufficient to prove manifest injustice)
- State v. Xie, 1992 (Ohio) (ineffective-assistance standard for withdrawal under Strickland)