State v. Moore, 2012 Ohio 5734

Moore was indicted for felonious assault; he pleaded not guilty, then on trial day pleaded guilty to amended count of attempted felonious assault.
Trial court accepted the guilty plea and set sentencing for August 2011; Moore failed to appear for sentencing and a warrant issued.
Nearly six months later, Moore was apprehended and brought to court for sentencing in February 2012 with new counsel.
New counsel filed a motion to withdraw the guilty plea, arguing need for more time to review transcript and discovery; the court denied the motion and sentenced Moore.
Moore received a three-year prison term and was informed of three years mandatory postrelease control.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Ineffective assistance of counsel	Moore asserts trial counsel failed to respond and file a withdrawal motion.	Moore contends counsel was ineffective for not timely filing to withdraw the plea.	No merit; no deficient performance or prejudice shown.
Pre-sentence withdrawal of plea	Moore argues the trial court abused discretion in denying withdrawal motion.	Moore contends there was a reasonable basis to withdraw based on new counsel's review needs.	No abuse of discretion; denial affirmed.

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (ineffective assistance standard)
State v. Bradley, 42 Ohio St.3d 136 (Ohio 1989) (ineffective assistance framework)
State v. Xie, 62 Ohio St.3d 521 (Ohio 1992) (pre-sentence withdrawal standard)
State v. Robinson, 2008-Ohio-4866 (8th Dist. 2008) (factors for denying withdrawal before sentencing)
State v. Tull, 168 Ohio App.3d 54 (Ohio 2006) (pre-sentence withdrawal standards expansion)
State v. Peterseim, 68 Ohio App.2d 211 (Ohio 1980) (pre-sentence withdrawal considerations)