State v. McClellan

2023 Ohio 2152
Ohio Court of Appeals·Decided June 28, 2023·No. 30304·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS )ss: NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF SUMMIT )

STATE OF OHIO C.A. No. 30304 Appellee

v. APPEAL FROM JUDGMENT ENTERED IN THE

KEVIN MCCLELLAN COURT OF COMMON PLEAS COUNTY OF SUMMIT, OHIO

Appellant CASE No. CR 19 05 1678

DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY Dated: June 28, 2023

FLAGG LANZINGER, Judge

{¶1} Appellant, Kevin McClellan, appeals from the decision of the Summit County Court of Common Pleas, denying a motion to withdraw his guilty plea. For the reasons that follow, this Court affirms.

I.

{¶2} On May 17, 2019, the Summit County Grand Jury indicted McClellan for one count of rape, in violation of R.C. 2907.02(A)(1), a felony of the first degree, and two counts of sexual battery, in violation of R.C. 2907.03(A)(3), each a felony of the third degree. The incident prompting the indictment occurred on May 15, 1999, twenty years earlier.

{¶3} On June 3, 2021, McClellan pled guilty to one count of rape. He executed a written plea of guilty for rape, in violation of R.C. 2907.02(A)(1). As part of the plea agreement, the State dismissed the two counts of sexual battery. McClellan was sentenced to four years in prison.

{¶4} On December 10, 2021, McClellan filed a post sentence motion to withdraw his guilty plea. Within his motion to withdraw his guilty plea, he argued ineffective assistance of counsel because previous counsel failed to file a motion to dismiss for preindictment delay. The motion to withdraw also claimed ineffective assistance of counsel for not obtaining complete discovery. McClellan claimed specific evidence was unavailable to him during discovery and requested an evidentiary hearing to further investigate missing evidence and demonstrate actual prejudice. McClellan provided an eight-page document in support of his motion to withdraw. The first page is a letter from McClellan’s treating physician outlining his various medical conditions but not including memory loss. That page also includes a request stating, “[p]lease allow the use of a BPAP at the setting of 25/19cm H20 with F&P Vitera/ Large mask for his Obstructive sleep apnea.” The remaining seven pages are a summary of McClellan’s medical history. Nothing was provided to substantiate the claim that the alleged specific missing evidence was unavailable.

{¶5} On March 17, 2022, without an evidentiary hearing, the trial court denied McClellan’s motion to withdraw his plea. McClellan has appealed raising one assignment of error for our review.

II.

ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR

THE TRIAL COURT ERRED BY NOT GRANTING KEVIN’S MOTION TO WITHDRAW HIS PLEA WITHOUT A HEARING[.]

{¶6} In his sole assignment of error, McClellan argues that the trial court erred when it denied his motion to withdraw his plea without a hearing. McClellan argues that he received ineffective assistance of counsel because (1) his trial counsel failed to file a motion to dismiss based upon pre-indictment delay, and (2) his trial counsel did not have all discovery materials. McClellan argues that but for the ineffective assistance of counsel, he would not have pleaded

guilty. McClellan argues he has been prejudiced and as a result his plea should be withdrawn. We disagree.

{¶7} “An appellate court reviews a trial court’s order denying a motion to withdraw a guilty plea for an abuse of discretion.” State v. West, 9th Dist. Lorain No. 17CA011110, 2018- Ohio-1176, ¶ 6, quoting State v. Robinson, 9th Dist. Summit No. 28065, 2016-Ohio-8444, ¶ 9. An abuse of discretion “implies that the court’s attitude is unreasonable, arbitrary or unconscionable.” Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217, 219 (1983).

{¶8} “A motion to withdraw a plea of guilty * * * may be made only before sentence is imposed; but to correct manifest injustice the court after sentence may set aside the judgment of conviction and permit the defendant to withdraw his or her plea.” (Alteration sic.) State v. Moton, 9th Dist. Summit No. 29982, 2022-Ohio-780, ¶ 5, quoting Crim.R. 32.1. “Post-sentence relief under Crim.R. 32.1 is only available in extraordinary cases characterized by ‘a fundamental flaw in the plea proceedings resulting in a miscarriage of justice.’” Moton at ¶ 5, quoting State v. Straley, 159 Ohio St.3d 82, 2019-Ohio-5206, ¶ 14.

{¶9} “One who enters a guilty plea has no right to withdraw it. It is within the sound discretion of the trial court to determine what circumstances justify granting such a motion.” State v. Xie, 62 Ohio St.3d 521, 526 (1992), quoting Barker v. United States, 579 F.2d 1219, 1223 (10th Cir.1978). “A defendant who seeks to withdraw a plea of guilty after the imposition of sentence has the burden of establishing the existence of manifest injustice.” State v. Smith, 49 Ohio St.2d 261 (1977), paragraph one of the syllabus. “The term ‘manifest injustice’ has been described as a ‘clear or openly unjust act.’” State v. Sibert, 9th Dist. Summit No. 29424, 2020-Ohio-3786, ¶ 9, quoting State v. Ruby, 9th Dist. Summit No. 23219, 2007-Ohio-244, ¶ 11.

{¶10} “An evidentiary hearing on a post-sentence motion to withdraw a guilty plea is not required if the ‘record indicates that the movant is not entitled to relief and the movant has failed to submit evidentiary documents sufficient to demonstrate a manifest injustice.’” State v. Razo, 9th Dist. Lorain No. 05CA008639, 2005-Ohio-3793, ¶ 20, quoting State v. Russ, 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 81580, 2003-Ohio-1001, ¶ 12.

{¶11} “Ineffective assistance of counsel can form the basis for a claim of manifest injustice to support withdrawal of a guilty plea pursuant to Crim.R. 32.1.” State v. Graham, 9th Dist. Summit No. 28153, 2017-Ohio-908, ¶ 8, quoting State v. Adames, 5th Dist. Licking No. 16- CA-45, 2017-Ohio-587, ¶ 9. In addition, “[t]his Court has held that [a] guilty plea is not voluntary if it is the result of ineffective assistance of counsel.” (Internal quotations and citation omitted.) State v. Bravo, 9th Dist. Summit No. 27881, 2017-Ohio-272, ¶ 7.

{¶12} “This Court uses a two-step process as set forth in Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984), to determine whether a defendant’s right to the effective assistance of counsel has been violated.” Bravo at ¶ 8.

When the Strickland test is applied to guilty pleas, the defendant must first show that counsel’s performance was deficient. Next, the defendant must show that there is a reasonable probability that but for counsel’s errors, he would not have pleaded guilty. [T]he mere fact that, if not for the alleged ineffective assistance, the defendant would not have entered the guilty plea, is not sufficient to establish the necessary connection between the ineffective assistance and the plea; instead, the ineffective assistance will only be found to have affected the validity of the plea when it precluded the defendant from entering the plea knowingly and voluntarily.

(Internal quotations and citations omitted.) Bravo at ¶ 9, quoting State v. Gegia, 157 Ohio App.3d 112, 2004-Ohio-2124, ¶ 17 (9th Dist.).

{¶13} “The Ohio Supreme Court has recognized that a court need not analyze both prongs of the Strickland test, where the issue may be disposed upon consideration of one of the factors.” Bravo at ¶ 10. This court need not address both elements in any particular order-if we find that

there was no prejudice to McClellan by defense counsel’s acts, we need not address whether defense counsel’s acts were actually deficient. See State v. Bradley, 42 Ohio St.3d 136, 141 (1989).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

State v. McClellan, 2023 Ohio 2152 (Ohio Ct. App. 2023).

2023 Ohio 2152 (State v. McClellan) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Cottrell
Ohio Court of Appeals, 2026
State v. Jones
2024 Ohio 1588 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2024)