State v. Simon
2015 Ohio 4448
Ohio Ct. App.2015Background
- At 16, Mitchell Simon set fires and tied bedroom doorknobs to prevent his parents' escape; charged as an adult with two counts of attempted aggravated murder and one count of aggravated arson.
- Simon pled guilty to all counts and was sentenced to nine years on each count, concurrent. He later challenged his convictions and sentence on appeal and via postconviction filings.
- This court (Simon I) upheld the bindover statute's constitutionality and affirmed convictions, but held aggravated arson and attempted aggravated murder were allied offenses and remanded for resentencing with instructions to merge one conviction.
- Before resentencing Simon filed a second motion to withdraw his guilty plea (repeating ineffective-assistance and plea-misinformation claims) and asserted it was a presentence motion because the original sentence was allegedly void.
- On remand the state elected to proceed on the two attempted aggravated murder counts; the court merged the arson count and resentenced Simon to concurrent nine-year terms, then denied Simon’s second motion to withdraw as a post-sentence motion without a hearing.
- Simon appealed; the appellate court concluded the trial court lacked authority on remand to entertain a motion to withdraw a plea after affirmance except for the limited allied-offenses resentencing, and rejected Simon’s constitutional challenge to the bindover statute.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court erred by denying a hearing on and denying Simon’s motion to withdraw his guilty plea | State: trial court properly treated the motion as post-sentence and denied it without a hearing | Simon: the motion was presentence because this court’s remand voided the original sentence, so it should be freely granted under Crim.R. 32.1 | Court: motion was post-sentence on remand; trial court lacked authority to consider a post-appeal plea-withdrawal motion and did not err in denying it without a hearing |
| Whether Simon’s plea should be withdrawn on grounds of ineffective assistance / plea misinformation | State: prior appeals and postconviction review already addressed these claims and convictions were affirmed | Simon: counsel misinformed him about likely sentence (community control/short term), establishing manifest injustice | Court: claims previously litigated/appealed; on remand those convictions remain law of the case and post-remand plea withdrawal not permitted; no manifest injustice shown |
| Whether the trial court lacked jurisdiction because R.C. 2152.12 (mandatory bindover) is unconstitutional | State: bindover statute is constitutional and conferred jurisdiction | Simon: mandatory bindover statute violates due process, so trial court lacked jurisdiction | Court: bindover statute is constitutional; juvenile bindover procedures satisfy due process; trial court had jurisdiction |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Caraballo, 17 Ohio St.3d 66 (Ohio 1985) (post-sentence withdrawal requires showing of manifest injustice)
- State ex rel. Special Prosecutors v. Judges, Belmont Cty. Court of Common Pleas, 55 Ohio St.2d 94 (Ohio 1978) (Crim.R. 32.1 does not permit trial court to vacate judgment affirmed on appeal)
- State v. Ketterer, 126 Ohio St.3d 448 (Ohio 2010) (Crim.R. 32.1 post-appeal jurisdictional limits reaffirmed)
- State v. Wilson, 129 Ohio St.3d 214 (Ohio 2011) (remand for allied-offenses sentencing error leaves guilty verdicts as law of the case)