State v. Redavide
2016 Ohio 7804
Ohio Ct. App.2016Background
- Defendant Joshua M. Redavide was tried on an involuntary-manslaughter indictment; on day three of trial he entered a no-contest plea after a Crim.R. 11 colloquy and was sentenced to nine years’ imprisonment.
- On direct appeal this court affirmed the conviction and remanded only to correct a clerical entry.
- While direct appeal was pending, Redavide filed an R.C. 2953.21 petition claiming his plea was not knowing, intelligent, and voluntary because trial counsel pressured him to plead and promised a three-to-five year sentence if he pled (and a much harsher sentence if he did not).
- The trial court found genuine issues of material fact as to whether counsel pressured Redavide or assured a 3–5 year sentence and held an evidentiary hearing; witnesses (Redavide and two relatives) testified to counsel’s statements and pressure; counsel testified he never promised a specific sentence and only discussed possibilities and sought a low-end term.
- The trial court credited counsel’s testimony, rejected the petition, and concluded there was no overborne will or promise causing manifest injustice; the court denied post-conviction relief after the hearing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Redavide) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court erred by applying the Crim.R. 32.1 "manifest injustice" standard to an R.C. 2953.21 petition | Implicitly relied on trial court’s use of the manifest-injustice language (invited error noted) | 2953.21 petitions should be evaluated under statutory post-conviction standards, not Crim.R. 32.1 manifest-injustice standard | Court agreed manifest-injustice standard did not apply but found no reversible error (appellant had relied on that standard and outcome turned on credibility) |
| Whether the trial court’s denial of the petition (after hearing) was against the weight of the evidence/abuse of discretion | Counsel’s testimony credible; trial court’s credibility findings are supported by the record | Counsel pressured and promised a 3–5 year sentence, so plea was involuntary and relief warranted | Court held the trial court’s credibility determinations were supported by competent, credible evidence; no abuse of discretion; petition denied |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. White, 118 Ohio St.3d 12 (2008) (standard of review for R.C. 2953.21 denials: abuse of discretion and reliance on competent, credible evidence)