State v. Ulery, 2011 Ohio 4549

Ulery indicted in April 2008 on two counts of conspiracy to commit aggravated murder and one count of attempted aggravated murder.
Ulery pledged guilty to one conspiracy-to-aggravated-murder count before trial; other charges dismissed.
Ulery appealed; appellate counsel filed Anders brief alleging ineffective assistance and lack of understanding of rights.
We affirmed the conviction in February 2010, holding trial counsel effective and plea knowingly voluntary.
In November 2009 Ulery moved to withdraw his guilty plea; the trial court denied the motion August 23, 2010 without a hearing.
Ulery appeals the post-sentence denial of Crim.R. 32.1 relief, asserting manifest injustice and trial-counsel deficiencies were raised.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court abused its discretion in denying Crim.R. 32.1 relief.	Ulery argues the plea was not knowingly voluntary due to ineffective assistance.	Ulery contends issues were previously adjudicated; res judicata applies; hearing not required.	No abuse of discretion; relief denied; res judicata bars the claims.

State v. Brooks, 2010-Ohio-1682 (Montgomery App. No. 23385) (post-sentence withdrawal requires manifest injustice or a plea defect)
State v. McComb, 2009-Ohio-295 (Montgomery App. Nos. 22570, 22571) (hearing only if facts would require withdrawal)
State v. Turner, 2007-Ohio-1346 (Ohio App.) (discretionary standard for Crim.R. 32.1 review)
State v. Madrigal, 2011-Ohio-798 (Lucas App.) (res judicata bars claims that could have been raised on direct appeal)
Norwood v. McDonald, 142 Ohio St. 299 (1943) (illustrates res judicata principle)
Nolan v. Nolan, 11 Ohio St.3d 1 (1984) (law-of-the-case doctrine retains controlling law for subsequent proceedings)
State v. Adams, 1980 (Ohio St.2d 151) (abuse of discretion standard for trial court rulings)