State v. Musleh

Citations

• 2017 Ohio 8166

Syllabus

No contest plea knowing, intelligent and voluntary plea Crim.R. 11(B)(2) Crim.R. 11(C)(2)(b) effect-of-plea requirement presentence motion to withdraw plea abuse of discretion substantial compliance partial compliance presumption prejudice ineffective assistance of counsel failure to pursue motion to suppress legitimate expectation of privacy in premises searched. Trial court did not err in accepting defendant's no contest plea and did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant's presentence motion to withdraw his plea. Where defendant was advised of the essence and negative effects of his no contest plea and presumption that defendant understood the effect of his plea applied, trial court partially complied with the effect-of-plea requirement under Crim.R. 11(C)(2)(b). Defendant did not establish that he suffered any prejudice as a result of the trial court's failure to fully comply with Crim.R. 11(C)(2)(b). Defendant did not establish that he received ineffective assistance of counsel based on trial counsel's recommendation that he enter a plea that allegedly offered no benefit or trial counsel's failure to pursue a motion to suppress evidence that was not likely to have been successful.