State v. Houk

Citations

• 2021 Ohio 2107

Syllabus

Crim.R. 32.1 postsentence motion to withdraw guilty plea evidentiary hearing knowing, voluntary, intelligent plea manifest injustice ineffective assistance of counsel self-defense conflict of interest conclusory, unsubstantiated allegations. Trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant's motion to withdraw his guilty plea, filed ten years after he entered plea, without a hearing. Defendant's claims that he was denied effective assistance of counsel based on counsel's alleged statement there was no self-defense law in Ohio, a potential conflict of interest involving counsel's prior representation of the state's key witness and counsel's alleged failure to communicate with or provide discovery to defendant were unsubstantiated. Defendant did not set forth any facts in his affidavit or identify any facts in the record that suggest that a self-defense defense would have been available to defendant if he had proceeded to trial. Defendant did not present any evidence or cite any authority to indicate that a conflict of interest existed based on attorney's prior, unrelated representation of the state's witness or that defendant's waiver of any potential conflict of interest was ineffective. Defendant did not show how his alleged failure to receive discovery or to communicate more with his attorneys precluded him from entering a knowing, voluntary and intelligent guilty plea.