State v. Robinson
2022 Ohio 1311
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2022Background
- In August 2019 two children of appellant's wife were reported missing after being disciplined and kicked out of the home; authorities later learned they had walked to a relative's house barefoot. Bedford police and other departments searched and responded.
- Investigation revealed prior incidents: (1) May 2018—appellant shaved the pubic regions of both children and acknowledged his finger may have contacted an eight‑year‑old's vagina (allegation unsubstantiated by child services); (2) Feb 2019—appellant disciplined a child with an electrical cord, causing scarring.
- A seven‑count indictment charged appellant with multiple counts including endangering children, gross sexual imposition (nolled in plea), and obstructing official business. Appellant pled guilty pursuant to a package plea: guilty to one second‑degree endangering, one third‑degree endangering, and one fifth‑degree obstruction; remaining counts nolled.
- Sentencing: the court imposed five years on the second‑degree count and 18 months on the third‑degree count (concurrent), and a 60‑month community‑control sanction on the obstruction count (concurrent). Parties agreed to joint and several restitution of $1,205.68 to responding police departments; court entries mistakenly listed $1,205.58.
- Appellant appealed pro se raising six assignments (ineffective assistance, restitution/ability to pay, coerced plea, prosecutorial misconduct re 2018 incident, speedy‑trial violations, and sentencing error). The court affirmed judgment, granted appointed counsel’s Anders withdrawal, and remanded only to correct the clerical restitution amount.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance of counsel | Counsel fully represented appellant; record shows advisement and plea was voluntary | Counsel failed to explain penalties, restitution, and respond to prosecutor’s threat, causing involuntary plea | Overruled — plea colloquy and record show voluntariness; ineffective‑assistance claims not shown or require post‑conviction evidence |
| Restitution / ability to pay | Restitution was an agreed term of the plea; court considered PSI, so requirement to consider ability to pay satisfied | Court failed to consider appellant’s ability to pay before ordering $1,205.58 | Overruled — restitution was part of plea, PSI considered; court remanded to correct clerical arithmetic error to $1,205.68 |
| Coerced guilty plea (threat to reindict on rape) | Prosecutor may permissibly threaten more serious charges during plea bargaining | Threat to reindict on rape rendered plea involuntary/coerced | Overruled — Bordenkircher principle permits risk of greater charges; appellant repeatedly denied threats at plea and did not show coercion |
| Prosecutorial misconduct re 2018 incident | State’s sentencing comments responded to defense memo and were fair; court independently reviewed PSI and sentencing factors | Prosecutor misrepresented unsubstantiated Social Services matter to influence incarceration | Overruled — no plain error; defense opened the issue and trial court relied on PSI and its independent review |
| Speedy‑trial violations | No constitutional violation: delay largely caused by appellant, COVID tolling, and many continuances; no demonstrated prejudice | Delay between arrest and plea (~1 year) violated constitutional and statutory speedy‑trial rights | Overruled — Barker factors weighed against appellant; no plain error shown |
| Sentence / judicial bias | Sentence within statutory ranges; court considered R.C. 2929.11/2929.12 and PSI; no evidence of bias | Trial court was biased and failed to follow sentencing factors; five‑year sentence excessive | Overruled — presumption of judicial impartiality not overcome; sentence not contrary to law and within statutory limits |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (permitting counsel to file a brief seeking leave to withdraw when an appeal is frivolous)
- Bordenkircher v. Hayes, 434 U.S. 357 (prosecutor may threaten more severe charges in plea negotiations)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (standard for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 (four‑factor balancing test for constitutional speedy‑trial claims)
- State v. Dangler, 162 Ohio St.3d 1, 164 N.E.3d 286 (Crim.R. 11 plea‑colloquy review focuses on defendant’s understanding)
- State v. Bonnell, 140 Ohio St.3d 209 (trial court need not state reasons on the record when it considers required sentencing factors)
- State v. Marcum, 146 Ohio St.3d 516 (appellate standard for reviewing felony sentences under R.C. 2953.08)