State v. Strong, 2013 Ohio 5189

Appellant was charged in a two-count indictment with conspiracy to commit illegal assembly/possession of chemicals for drug manufacture and conspiracy to commit illegal manufacture of drugs.
She pled guilty to the fourth-degree felony (conspiracy to commit illegal assembly or possession of chemicals for the manufacture of drugs) under a plea bargain that dismissed the third-degree felony and recommended community control.
Co-defendants Rufo and Stetz had motions to suppress pending; their motions were not heard before appellant pled.
The trial court conducted a guilty-plea hearing on September 17, 2012, found the plea knowing, voluntary, and intelligent, and dismissed the third-degree felony.
At sentencing on December 17, 2012, appellant received two years of community control despite prior theft, OVI, and drug-conviction history, based on the state's recommendation.
Appellant challenges the conviction on the sole issue of ineffective assistance of counsel related to the guilty plea.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether appellant’s guilty plea was involuntary due to ineffective assistance.	Strong contends counsel’s failures affected plea voluntariness.	Strong argues counsel failed to inform about suppress motions and case defensibility.	Not well-taken; plea found voluntary; no showing of prejudice.

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (established two-prong standard for ineffective assistance of counsel)
Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52 (U.S. 1985) (prejudice prong in guilty-plea cases requires showing would have gone to trial)
Kapper v. State, 5 Ohio St.3d 36 (Ohio 1983) (defendant bears burden of affidavits to rebut plea voluntariness; coercion claims require supporting materials)
State v. Belknap, 2004-Ohio-5636 (Ohio- App. 2004) (attorney’s duty to file suppression not universal; deficient performance may exist with reasonable grounds)
State v. Payton, 2004-Ohio-5636 (Ohio App. 1997) (ineffective assistance may be shown where there are reasonable grounds for suppression)
State v. Fitzgerald, 2002-Ohio-3914 (Ohio App. 2002) (suppression issues; prejudice prong tied to guilty plea effectiveness)
State v. Gotel, 2007-Ohio-888 (Ohio App. 2007) (guilty plea validity not defeated by unproven ineffectiveness claims)
State v. Curd, 2004-Ohio-7222 (Ohio App. 2004) (prejudice prong requires showing would have gone to trial)
State v. Wyley, 1994-Ohio- LEXIS (Ohio App. 1994) (illustrative on record-based voluntariness of plea)
State v. Madeline, 11th Dist. Lake No. 2000-T-0156 (2002) (regarding knowing and voluntary plea)