State v. Milite, 2020 Ohio 5384

Nichole Milite was indicted on three felony counts: one count of illegal conveyance of drugs onto a government facility and two counts of aggravated possession of drugs (all with forfeiture specifications).
She initially pleaded not guilty, waived presence at arraignment, and filed a motion to suppress evidence.
During pretrial negotiations she pleaded guilty to two counts of aggravated possession of drugs (with forfeiture), and the remaining count was dismissed.
After the plea, defense counsel withdrew the motion to suppress, stating the withdrawal was a result of the plea negotiations.
At sentencing the court imposed concurrent community-control terms, 192 days in jail (with 102 days credit), and drug-rehab and other conditions.
Milite appealed, arguing (1) her plea was not knowing/voluntary because she did not understand community control could include local jail, and (2) her plea was not knowing/voluntary because she did not know the court would not rule on her motion to suppress. The trial court’s judgment was affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Milite)	Held
Whether plea was involuntary because defendant did not understand community control could include local jail	Milite was informed the court could impose prison, jail, or community control and that the court need not follow recommendations	Milite says she did not understand that community control could include a local jail term and would not have pled if she had known	Court: Plea was voluntary; Milite was told the maximum jail term and that the court could reject recommendations; sentencing discretion after a plea does not invalidate the plea (Crim.R.11 governs plea entry, not sentencing).
Whether plea was involuntary because the court would not rule on the motion to suppress after the plea	Trial court was not required to advise about suppression issues; counsel expressly withdrew the motion as a result of the plea; Milite had consulted counsel and proceeded knowingly	Milite says she expected the suppression motion to be decided and would not have pled if she’d known it would not be ruled on	Court: Plea was voluntary; withdrawal of the suppression motion was a consequence of the plea and Milite had opportunity to discuss the matter with counsel and chose to plead.

State v. Johnson, 40 Ohio St.3d 130 (Ohio 1988) (Crim.R. 11 applies only to entry and acceptance of a plea and does not govern the trial court’s sentencing discretion)