State v. Singh
2014 Ohio 3377
Ohio Ct. App.2014Background
- Gurwinder Singh was indicted on rape (R.C. 2907.02(A)(2), 1st degree), kidnapping, and disrupting public service from a Feb. 25, 2013 incident; State alleged he held a woman, knocked away her phone while she called 9‑1‑1, and raped her.
- An interpreter was appointed; Singh initially pled not guilty and later entered a negotiated written guilty plea to the rape count in exchange for dismissal of remaining counts.
- At the Oct. 9, 2013 plea hearing the trial court—via interpreter—advised Singh that the offense was probationable and there was a presumption of prison (incorrect advice regarding mandatory prison).
- On Oct. 11 the court, defense counsel, and the State agreed on the record (without addressing Singh) that the prior advice was mistaken and that the rape offense carried a mandatory prison term; the written plea form was amended, but Singh was not re‑advised on the record or asked to reaffirm his plea.
- Singh filed a pre‑sentence motion to withdraw his guilty plea; the trial court denied the motion and sentenced him to five years' imprisonment. The appellate court reversed and remanded, finding the plea was not knowingly made because Singh was not properly informed of the mandatory nature of the sentence or given an opportunity to re‑evaluate the plea.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court erred by denying Singh’s pre‑sentence motion to withdraw his guilty plea | State: the mistaken advisement was corrected at the Oct. 11 proceeding and the written plea was amended, so any defect was cured; denial was proper because State would be prejudiced and evidence of guilt was strong | Singh: initial plea was not knowing/intelligent because court incorrectly advised him re: mandatory prison and he was not re‑advised on the record or given chance to reconsider after the correction | Reversed: plea was voidable — court erred in denying the motion because Singh was not properly informed on the record about the mandatory sentence nor given an opportunity to re‑evaluate his plea |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Xie, 62 Ohio St.3d 521 (Ohio 1992) (sets standard for trial court discretion and hearing on pre‑sentence plea withdrawal)
- State v. Boles, 187 Ohio App.3d 345 (Ohio App. 2010) (abuse‑of‑discretion test for plea withdrawal decisions)
- State v. Fish, 104 Ohio App.3d 236 (Ohio App. 1995) (factors to consider in evaluating motions to withdraw guilty pleas)