State v. West, 2016 Ohio 7864

Background

In 2009 Jamal West was indicted on charges from a violent home-invasion (aggravated burglary, aggravated robbery with firearm specification, rape, etc.). DNA samples from a hammer and knives were analyzed by the Columbus Police Crime Lab.
In 2011 West pleaded guilty to aggravated burglary, aggravated robbery (with a 3-year firearm spec), and rape; eight counts were dismissed. He admitted being at the scene, possessing a hammer, assisting in the robbery, and failing to stop a rape. The trial court found the plea knowing, voluntary, and intelligent.
West filed a timely post-plea motion to withdraw (May 2011), claiming misunderstanding of the DNA evidence; the trial court denied the motion and sentenced him to 33 years. This court affirmed on direct appeal in 2012.
In 2014 the CPD lab issued a revised report changing its interpretation: it withdrew the earlier CODIS entry and said the hammer profile was a low-level mixture unsuitable for interpretation. West moved (Apr. 1, 2015) to withdraw his guilty plea again, arguing the earlier DNA “hit” was erroneous and was a basis for manifest injustice.
The state produced an affidavit from an Ohio crime-lab official asserting the underlying DNA data were interpretable and consistent with a mixed profile and that the earlier conclusions were substantively consistent; the state argued lack of jurisdiction and res judicata.
The trial court declined to hear the motion, holding it lacked jurisdiction because the prior denial and appellate affirmation were final; it also stated no manifest injustice occurred. West appeals that ruling.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether trial court had jurisdiction to hear a post-sentence motion to withdraw a guilty plea after an appellate affirmation	State: Trial court lacks jurisdiction after appellate affirmance; prior appeal controls	West: New DNA report raises new issues that could not have been raised previously, so trial court may consider the motion	Court: Trial court correctly ruled it lacked jurisdiction under Special Prosecutors and related authority; affirmed
Whether the new crime-lab report and changed reporting create a "manifest injustice" under Crim.R. 32.1	State: DNA data substantively unchanged; affidavit supports initial conclusions; no manifest injustice	West: Lab’s retraction of CODIS entry and change in interpretation materially undermines his plea reliance and shows manifest injustice	Court: Did not reach merits because of lack of jurisdiction; noted no manifest injustice in any event given West’s admissions
Whether res judicata bars consideration of the new motion	State: Arguments barred because they were or could have been raised earlier	West: New evidence could not have been raised earlier; res judicata inapplicable	Court: Declined to decide res judicata as moot after finding lack of jurisdiction
Whether West's plea was knowingly, intelligently, voluntarily entered	State: Plea colloquy and PSI admissions demonstrate plea was valid	West: Plea relied on erroneous DNA interpretation	Court: Prior appellate decision already held plea valid; trial court lacked power to revisit that finding

Key Cases Cited

State ex rel. Special Prosecutors v. Judges, Court of Common Pleas, 55 Ohio St.2d 94 (1978) (trial court lacks jurisdiction to vacate a judgment after appellate affirmance)
State v. Ketterer, 126 Ohio St.3d 488 (2010) (trial court lacks jurisdiction to consider post-appeal motion to withdraw guilty plea where convictions affirmed and remand limited)
State ex rel. Cordray v. Marshall, 123 Ohio St.3d 229 (2009) (trial court lacks jurisdiction to grant relief from judgment after conviction affirmed)
Nolan v. Nolan, 11 Ohio St.3d 1 (1984) (law-of-the-case doctrine: inferior courts must follow superior court mandate)
Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (1983) (abuse-of-discretion standard defined)
State v. Smith, 49 Ohio St.2d 261 (1977) (standard for manifest injustice allowing post-sentence plea withdrawal)