State v. Ogle, 2014 Ohio 2251

Appellant Melanie Ogle appeals a trial court judgment denying her Crim.R. 32.1 motion to withdraw an Alford plea, set aside the sentence, and dismiss the indictment.
Appellant had previously been convicted by a jury of assault on a peace officer and received a suspended sentence with probation and restitution.
As part of that sentence, she wore an ankle monitor; she damaged the device by submerging it in water, leading to a new vandalism indictment.
On May 11, 2012, she entered an Alford Plea to criminal damaging, with a negotiated sentence and waivers of some rights; the court accepted the plea.
Appellant appealed the Alford plea in a consolidated set of cases; this court affirmed the trial court's acceptance of the plea in 2013.
On August 5, 2013, she moved again to withdraw the Alford Plea and set aside the sentence; the trial court overruled the motion, and appellate review followed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court abused its discretion in denying Crim.R. 32.1 motion	Ogle contends the plea was not knowing/voluntary due to incompetent counsel and misrepresented rights.	State argues res judicata and law-of-the-case principles bar relitigation; issues were or could have been raised previously in direct appeal.	No abuse of discretion; motion properly denied.
Whether all issues could have been raised on direct appeal	Ogle asserts new arguments on waiver of appeal rights were not fully adjudicated previously.	State contends such arguments were or could have been raised in consolidated appeals and are barred by law-of-the-case/ res judicata.	Yes, issues were or could have been raised on direct appeal; court relied on prior appellate decisions and law-of-the-case.

McCann v. State, 2011-Ohio-3339 (4th Dist. Lawr. No. 10CA12 (2011)) (plea withdrawal standard under Crim.R. 32.1 is reviewed for abuse of discretion)
State v. Szefcyk, 77 Ohio St.3d 93 (1996) (law of the case/ res judicata principles apply to relitigating issues)
State v. Congrove, 2010-Ohio-2933 (5th Dist. Del.) (manifest injustice standard; post-sentence withdrawal viability)
State v. Moore, 2002-Ohio-5748 (4th Dist. Pike) (evidentiary hearing not required if record conclusively contradicts allegations)
Special Prosecutors v. Judges, 55 Ohio St.2d 94 (1978) (trial court cannot undermine appellate court’s jurisdiction after appeal)
Petro v. Marshall, 2006-Ohio-5357 (4th Dist. Scioto No. 05CA3004) (law-of-the-case/post-appeal proceedings limitations)
Nolan v. Nolan, 11 Ohio St.3d 1 (1984) (law-of-the-case doctrine relevance in appellate proceedings)