State v. Hughey

Citations

• 2025 Ohio 3152

Syllabus

Denial of presentence motion to withdraw plea; abuse of discretion; package plea deal; actual innocence claim; coercion. Judgment affirmed. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by denying the appellant's presentence motion to withdraw his plea. The record reflects that the appellant was (1) represented by highly competent counsel at the time of his plea; (2) afforded a full Crim.R. 11 hearing where it was determined that he understood the nature of the charges and possible penalties before entering his plea; (3) given a complete and impartial hearing on his motion to withdraw his plea; and (4) given full and fair consideration of his plea-withdrawal request. The record further indicates that, although the appellant timely made his request to withdraw his plea, the State would have been prejudiced by a withdrawal of the plea. The appellant's new actual innocence claim was contradicted by his prior statements and admission of guilt and was insufficient to vacate his knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently entered plea. The appellant was not denied due process because his plea was a package deal with his codefendant; he was represented by competent counsel and was capable of intelligently and voluntarily entering his plea.