State v. Newman
2016 Ohio 2667
Ohio Ct. App.2016Background
- James S. Newman was indicted (Feb 2013) and, as an indigent, was appointed counsel; he later pleaded guilty to ten counts and was sentenced to an aggregate eight years imprisonment.
- Newman orally requested substitute appointed counsel at a June 28 / July 2, 2013 pretrial hearing; the trial court denied the request.
- No praecipe or transcript of the July 2, 2013 pretrial hearing was included in the appellate record.
- Newman did not timely appeal the October 28, 2013 judgment; this court granted leave for a delayed appeal on May 8, 2015.
- On appeal Newman asserted a single assignment of error: that the trial court erred by denying his request for new appointed counsel in violation of the Sixth Amendment.
- The Sixth District affirmed, holding the record was incomplete (no transcript of the pretrial hearing) and therefore the court must presume regularity of the trial court’s proceedings; Newman failed to carry his burden to show error.
Issues
| Issue | Newman’s Argument | State’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether denial of request for substitute appointed counsel violated Sixth Amendment | Denial was unconstitutional because indigent defendants cannot substitute appointed counsel while defendants who can pay may substitute retained counsel | Trial court acted within discretion; substitution of counsel is not automatic and requires showing good cause or is subject to court’s balancing of interests | Affirmed — court declined to review merits because appellant failed to include transcript; record presumption of regularity applies |
Key Cases Cited
- Powell v. Alabama, 287 U.S. 45 (1932) (recognizes right to counsel in criminal cases)
- Caplin & Drysdale, Chartered v. United States, 491 U.S. 617 (1989) (indigent defendants do not have right to appointed counsel of their choice)
- Wheat v. United States, 486 U.S. 153 (1988) (court may refuse substitution of counsel to protect fair administration of justice)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (right is to effective assistance of counsel, not counsel of choice)
- United States v. Calabro, 467 F.2d 973 (2d Cir. 1972) (substitution of appointed counsel requires showing good cause such as conflict or breakdown in communication)
- State v. Murphy, 91 Ohio St.3d 516 (2001) (Ohio precedent on substitution of counsel standard)
- State v. Coleman, 37 Ohio St.3d 286 (1988) (discusses breakdown in attorney-client relationship standard)