State v. Stuart
2017 Ohio 8572
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- In 2016 Billy D. Stuart was indicted on multiple drug- and weapons-related counts, including two trafficking counts (each with a one-year firearm specification), two possession counts, having weapons while under disability, carrying a concealed weapon, and possession of criminal tools; forfeiture was sought.
- Stuart entered a plea agreement: guilty to both trafficking counts with attendant one-year firearm specifications and guilty to having weapons while under disability; the state nolled the remaining counts; the weapon was agreed to be forfeited.
- The trial court sentenced Stuart to an aggregate six-year prison term, imposed a mandatory $10,000 fine, and advised him of five years of postrelease control.
- Stuart was granted leave to file a delayed appeal; appellate counsel was appointed and filed an Anders brief seeking leave to withdraw, concluding any appeal would be frivolous.
- Counsel reviewed the record for Crim.R. 11 compliance (knowing, voluntary, intelligent plea) and for sentencing error and found no prejudicial errors; the court independently reviewed the record.
- The appellate court agreed with counsel, granted counsel’s motion to withdraw, and dismissed the appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Stuart’s guilty plea complied with Crim.R. 11 (knowing, voluntary, intelligent) | The state contends the plea was valid under Crim.R. 11 because the record shows required advisements and no deviations | Stuart did not raise a pro se challenge; implicitly contests plea validity by appealing | Court found no Crim.R. 11 defects; plea was knowing, voluntary, and intelligent; no arguable merit to appeal |
| Whether sentencing (including mandatory fine and postrelease control) contained reviewable error | State defends sentence as within plea agreement and lawful | Stuart did not present specific sentencing challenges on appeal | Court found no sentencing errors; sentence and advisements were proper; no arguable ground for appeal |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) (counsel may move to withdraw on appeal if brief identifies record portions that might arguably support appeal and the court independently reviews for nonfrivolous issues)