State v. Nikolic, 2020 Ohio 3718

Petar Nikolic was indicted on kidnapping, two counts of domestic violence, and obstructing official business; he pleaded guilty to amended Count 1 (attempted abduction, felony 4) and Count 2 (domestic violence, 1st‑degree misdemeanor); other counts were nolled.
The trial court imposed five years of community control on each count; the journal entry needs nunc pro tunc correction to reflect five years on each count.
In September 2018 Nikolic filed a motion to disqualify his court‑appointed counsel alleging poor investigation, failure to obtain discovery, repeated competency evaluations, and other failings; the trial court never entered an explicit ruling on that motion (deemed denied on appeal).
Nikolic entered his guilty plea after competency evaluations found him competent; during the plea colloquy he affirmed satisfaction with counsel and acknowledged the court’s immigration advisement under R.C. 2943.031(A).
Nikolic later argued counsel was ineffective for (1) the court’s failure to address his disqualification motion and (2) failing to advise him that his pleas would subject him to mandatory deportation.
The court concluded counsel had been deficient in failing to fully advise about the mandatory deportation consequence but Nikolic failed to show prejudice; the convictions were affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court’s failure to rule on Nikolic’s motion to disqualify counsel deprived him of effective assistance	State: Plea waived pre‑plea errors; Nikolic did not show plea was unknowing or involuntary	Nikolic: Court’s failure to act on motion, combined with counsel’s poor performance, meant he lacked effective assistance and likely would not have pled	Court: Plea waived most claims; record shows plea was knowing, voluntary, and Nikolic affirmed satisfaction with counsel; no reasonable probability he would have refused plea — assignment overruled
Whether counsel was ineffective for not advising that the guilty plea carried mandatory deportation	State: Court complied with statutory advisement; Nikolic did not prove he would have rejected plea even if fully advised	Nikolic: Counsel failed to inform him pleading would result in mandatory deportation, violating Padilla and Strickland	Court: Counsel deficient under Padilla for not fully advising mandatory deportation (Strickland first prong satisfied) but Nikolic failed to prove prejudice (no reasonable probability he would have gone to trial) — assignment overruled

Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356 (2010) (counsel must inform noncitizen client whether plea carries risk of deportation)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two‑prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52 (1985) (prejudice standard for plea‑based ineffective assistance claims)
Lafler v. Cooper, 566 U.S. 156 (2012) (effective assistance required at critical stages, including plea negotiations)
State v. Spates, 64 Ohio St.3d 269 (1992) (guilty plea waives antecedent errors unless plea was involuntary)
State v. Kelley, 57 Ohio St.3d 127 (1991) (guilty plea waives appellate challenges except those affecting voluntariness)
State v. Carter, 128 Ohio App.3d 419 (1998) (trial court must investigate timely, specific allegations that counsel is ineffective or conflicted)
State v. Xie, 62 Ohio St.3d 512 (1992) (Ohio restatement of Strickland ineffective‑assistance framework)
State v. Romero, 129 N.E.3d 404 (Ohio 2019) (trial court advisement does not substitute for counsel’s Padilla obligation)