DocketNumber: No. 07-CA-104.
Citation Numbers: 2008 Ohio 4733
Judges: BROGAN, J.
Filed Date: 9/19/2008
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 7/6/2016
{¶ 2} The record reflects that Jones received an August 2, 2004 misdemeanor citation for domestic violence, criminal damaging, and child endangering. Jones, who was *Page 2 a college student at the time, executed a waiver and plea form and entered uncounseled guilty pleas the same day. On the domestic violence charge, the trial court imposed a fine, a 30-day suspended jail sentence, and probation. On the criminal damaging charge, the trial court imposed a fine, a 180-day suspended jail sentence, probation, and ordered restitution. On the child endangering charge, the trial court imposed a fine, a 180-day jail sentence with 150 days suspended, and probation. A few days later, the trial court granted Jones early release and suspended the balance of her jail time. It terminated her probation in March 2007.
{¶ 3} On September 4, 2007, Jones moved to withdraw her guilty pleas. Her motion included a request for an evidentiary hearing. In support of her motion, Jones submitted an affidavit in which she pointed out that her pleas were uncounseled. She also asserted that she had just given birth to her second child and was suffering from depression when she entered the pleas. Finally, Jones claimed she had discovered in April 2005 that her guilty pleas could impact her ability to teach, which had been her chosen profession. The trial court overruled Jones' motion on September 6, 2007, reasoning as follows:
{¶ 4} "There is absolutely no basis for, or merit to, this motion. This Defendant signed a written and knowing waiver of her rights in 2004 prior to pleading guilty. At the time, she had completed 16 years of education. Her guilty plea was entered August 2, 2004. After she hired counsel who filed a motion for release, she was released from jail on August 9, 2004 and placed on probation. The attorney who filed for this release was Mr. Mulligan, and he raised no such issues. Now 3 years later, this new motion is filed. It is completely meritless and is overruled."
{¶ 5} On appeal, Jones contends the trial court erred in overruling her motion *Page 3 without a hearing. In support, she repeats, verbatim, the arguments she presented below, pointing out that her pleas were uncounseled, that she was suffering from depression, and that she was unaware of the impact convictions could have on her ability to teach.
{¶ 6} Under Crim. R. 32.1, a defendant who files a post-sentence motion to withdraw her guilty plea bears the burden of establishing a "manifest injustice." State v. Smith (1977),
{¶ 7} In the present case, Jones asserts, without elaboration or citation to authority, that her uncounseled pleas were "inappropriate" because she faced potential incarceration of 180 days. Under Crim. R. 2(C) and (D), the charges at issue were all petty offenses punishable by no more than six months of confinement. We are aware of no authority prohibiting uncounseled guilty pleas in cases involving petty offenses. Indeed, any criminal defendant has a right to waive counsel and plead guilty. The record contains a written waiver of Jones' right to an attorney and her right to have counsel appointed if indigent. *Page 4
She has not raised any issue on appeal regarding the adequacy of her waiver of counsel. See Smith,
{¶ 8} As noted above, Jones also asserts that she was suffering from depression when she entered her pleas. In addition, she contends she was unaware that entering the pleas could impact her ability to obtain a teaching license. According to Jones, she did not discover this fact until April 2005. Jones maintains that she would not have entered the pleas if she had not been under duress and if she had known the potential consequences of the convictions on her ability to teach.
{¶ 9} Upon review, we find no abuse of discretion in the trial court's denial of Jones' motion without a hearing. As an initial matter, her lengthy delay in seeking to withdraw her guilty pleas militates against her motion. Although Crim. R. 32.1 does not contain a time limit for filing a post-sentence motion to withdraw a plea, a trial court may take into consideration the passage of time between entry of a plea and a defendant's attempt to withdraw it. Smith,
{¶ 10} Jones entered her pleas in August 2004 and did not move to withdraw them until September 2007. In her affidavit, she admitted discovering in April 2005 — just eight months after entering her pleas — that the convictions would impact her ability to teach. Yet she waited nearly two and one-half more years before attempting to vacate the pleas. The trial court appropriately took this unreasonable delay into account in overruling her motion. Moreover, even accepting Jones' allegations as true, we find no manifest injustice arising from the fact that she was depressed when she entered her pleas or the fact that she failed to appreciate the potential consequences of the convictions on her ability to teach. Accordingly, we overrule her assignment of error.
{¶ 11} The judgment of the Xenia Municipal Court is affirmed.
WOLFF, P.J., and FAIN, J., concur.
Copies mailed to:
*Page 1Hon. Michael K. Murry
State v. Whitmore, 06-Ca-50 (5-9-2008) , 2008 Ohio 2226 ( 2008 )
State v. VanWinkle , 2021 Ohio 3849 ( 2021 )
State v. Johnson , 2021 Ohio 1333 ( 2021 )
State v. Donaldson , 2012 Ohio 5792 ( 2012 )
State v. Gibson, 2007 Ca 38 (11-14-2008) , 2008 Ohio 5904 ( 2008 )
State v. Zukowski, 22800 (12-12-2008) , 2008 Ohio 6541 ( 2008 )
State v. Curtis, 2008 Ca 22 (10-31-2008) , 2008 Ohio 5643 ( 2008 )
State v. Weaver , 2012 Ohio 2788 ( 2012 )
State v. Montgomery , 2012 Ohio 391 ( 2012 )
State v. Pritchett , 2011 Ohio 5978 ( 2011 )
State v. Newton , 2011 Ohio 2188 ( 2011 )
State v. Lauharn , 2012 Ohio 6185 ( 2012 )
Richmond Hts. v. McEllen , 2013 Ohio 3151 ( 2013 )