State v. Smith
2015 Ohio 4809
Ohio Ct. App.2015Background
- Sanjuan Smith pleaded guilty under Crim.R. 11 to attempted rape, kidnapping, and felonious assault and was sentenced (6, 2, and 2 years) to consecutive terms totaling ten years.
- Smith appealed; this court in Smith I partially reversed and remanded solely for resentencing to make the required consecutive-sentence findings under R.C. 2929.14(C).
- At the May 2, 2014 resentencing hearing Smith orally moved to withdraw his guilty plea. The trial court denied the motion, concluding it lacked jurisdiction to revisit the plea after the conviction had been affirmed on appeal.
- The trial court reimposed the ten-year term and entered the required consecutive-sentence findings at the hearing and in the judgment entry in compliance with State v. Bonnell.
- Appellate counsel filed an Anders/Toney no-merit brief addressing only whether denial of the oral motion to withdraw the plea was appealable; counsel concluded the appeal was frivolous and moved to withdraw.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court could consider an oral Crim.R. 32.1 motion to withdraw a plea after the conviction was affirmed and the case remanded only for resentencing | State: Trial court lacked jurisdiction on remand to revisit the plea; only resentencing for consecutive findings was authorized | Smith: He sought to withdraw his plea at resentencing and argued the court should hear the motion | Court: Remand limited to resentencing; plea issues were res judicata after appeal; denial of withdrawal was correct and frivolous to appeal |
| Whether consecutive-sentence findings were properly made on remand | State: Court reimposed sentence with findings required by R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) and Bonnell | Smith: (no non-frivolous challenge identified) | Court: Trial court made the three required findings at hearing and in the entry; sentencing complied with Bonnell |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967) (procedure for counsel seeking to withdraw on grounds appeal is frivolous)
- State v. Ketterer, 126 Ohio St.3d 448 (Ohio 2010) (trial court lacks authority to grant plea-withdrawal after conviction affirmed on appeal)
- State ex rel. Special Prosecutors v. Judges, 55 Ohio St.2d 94 (Ohio 1978) (matters concerning conviction become res judicata after appeal concludes)
- State v. Bonnell, 140 Ohio St.3d 209 (Ohio 2014) (consecutive-sentence findings must be made at sentencing and in the judgment entry)
- State v. Odorizzi, 126 Ohio App.3d 512 (Ohio Ct. App. 1998) (standards for appointed counsel seeking withdrawal on frivolous appeal)
- State v. Toney, 23 Ohio App.2d 203 (Ohio Ct. App. 1970) (procedure for court-appointed counsel to move to withdraw when appeal is frivolous)