[Cite as State v. Coleman, 2016-Ohio-5309.]
STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
)ss: NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
COUNTY OF SUMMIT )
STATE OF OHIO C.A. No. 28044
Appellee
v. APPEAL FROM JUDGMENT
ENTERED IN THE
TROY W. COLEMAN COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
COUNTY OF SUMMIT, OHIO
Appellant CASE No. CR 2010-10-2775
DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY
Dated: August 10, 2016
MOORE, Judge.
{¶1} Defendant-Appellant Troy W. Coleman appeals from the decision of the Summit
County Court of Common Pleas. We affirm.
I.
{¶2} In 2010, Mr. Coleman was indicted on six counts related to a traffic accident.
Ultimately, he pleaded guilty to aggravated vehicular assault, operating under the influence of
alcohol, and driving under suspension. The remaining three counts were dismissed. The trial
court sentenced Mr. Coleman to 7 years in prison, suspended his license for 10 years, and
ordered him to pay $55,000 in restitution.
{¶3} Mr. Coleman filed a direct appeal challenging whether he entered into his plea
knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently. See State v. Coleman (“Coleman I”), 9th Dist. Summit
No. 26008, 2012-Ohio-1712, ¶ 4. This Court affirmed the conviction. See id. at ¶ 14. Mr.
Coleman filed an untimely application to reopen his direct appeal, which this Court denied. See
2
State v. Coleman, 9th Dist. Summit No. 26008 (Apr. 23, 2013). Mr. Coleman then filed a
motion for discovery, which the trial court construed as a motion for post-conviction relief. The
trial court denied the motion, and Mr. Coleman appealed the ruling. This Court affirmed the trial
court’s judgment. See State v. Coleman, 9th Dist. Summit No. 27506, 2015-Ohio-752, ¶ 9.
{¶4} In 2015, Mr. Coleman filed a motion to withdraw his plea arguing that he
received ineffective assistance of counsel and the fact that violations of Brady v. Maryland, 373
U.S. 83 (1963), had occurred and the fact that the trial court sentenced him on allied offenses
further demonstrated his counsel’s ineffectiveness and the defectiveness of his plea. The State
opposed the motion. In denying his motion, the trial court relied on State ex rel. Special
Prosecutors v. Judges, Court of Common Pleas, 55 Ohio St.2d 94 (1978) and the doctrine of res
judicata.
{¶5} Mr. Coleman filed a request for a delayed appeal, which this Court granted. Mr.
Coleman, appearing pro se, has raised four assignments of error for our review, which we will
consider together to facilitate our review.
II.
ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR I
THE TRIAL COURT ERRED TO THE PREJUDICE OF [MR. COLEMAN]
WHEN IT HELD THAT [MR. COLEMAN’S] MOTION TO WITHDRAW HIS
GUILTY PLEA WA[S] BARRED BY RES JUDICATA AND BY THE LACK
OF JURISDICTION[.]
ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR II
THE TRIAL COURT ERRED TO THE PREJUDICE OF [MR. COLEMAN]
WHEN IT DENIED HIS MOTION TO WITHDRAW[] HIS GUILTY PLEA
WITHOUT HOLDING AN EVIDENTIARY HEARING BECAUSE THE
FACTS ALLEGED BY [MR. COLEMAN], IF ACCEPTED AS TRUE, WOULD
HAVE REQUIRED GRANTING A WITHDRAWAL AND SUCH FACTS
WERE SUFFICIENTLY CORROBORATED AND PRODUCED A
PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE.
3
ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR III
TRIAL COUNSEL’S NUMEROUS DEFICIENCIES AND FAILURE TO
INVESTIGATE IN ORDER TO STRUCTURE A PLAUSIBLE DEFENSE
PRIOR TO ADVISING [MR. COLEMAN] TO CHANGE HIS PLEA OT
GUILTY NOT ONLY CAUSED CUMULATIVE PREJUDICE BUT
VIOLATED THE 4TH AND 6TH AMENDMENTS TO THE US
CONSTITUTION AND ARTICLE 1, SECTION 10 OF THE OHIO
CONSTITUTION AND VIOLATED CRIM[.R.] 16(A) AND (D) AND 12(D) OF
THE COURT ROOM PROCEDURES AND ADVOCATE RULE 3.1(1), AND
(2) UNDER THE OHIO RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT[.]
ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR IV
TRIAL COURT AND COUNSEL’S FAILURE TO INQUIRE INTO ALLIED
OFFENSES AT SENTENCING HEARING IS PLAIN ERROR AND
VIOLATED THE 8TH AMENDMENT TO THE US CONSTITUTION AND
CRIM[.R.] 52(B)[.]
{¶6} Mr. Coleman asserts in his first assignment of error that the trial court erred in
concluding it lacked jurisdiction to consider his motion and in relying on res judicata in denying
his motion. In his second assignment of error, Mr. Coleman asserts that the trial court erred in
failing to hold a hearing on his motion. In his third and fourth assignments of error, Mr.
Coleman argues issues related to the merits of his claims.
{¶7} In Special Prosecutors, the Supreme Court of Ohio held that:
Crim.R. 32.1 does not vest jurisdiction in the trial court to maintain and determine
a motion to withdraw the guilty plea subsequent to an appeal and an affirmance
by the appellate court. While Crim.R. 32.1 apparently enlarges the power of the
trial court over its judgments without respect to the running of the court term, it
does not confer upon the trial court the power to vacate a judgment which has
been affirmed by the appellate court, for this action would affect the decision of
the reviewing court, which is not within the power of the trial court to do.
Id. at 97-98; see also State v. Calhoun, 9th Dist. Summit No. 27059, 2014-Ohio-2628, ¶ 5.
{¶8} Mr. Coleman filed a direct appeal, and this Court affirmed his convictions.
Coleman I, 2012-Ohio-1712, at ¶ 14. Thus, pursuant to Special Prosecutors, the trial court
4
lacked jurisdiction to consider Mr. Coleman’s motion to withdraw his guilty plea. See Calhoun
at ¶ 6; State v. Brown, 9th Dist. Summit No. 27749, 2016-Ohio-1066, ¶ 9. Accordingly, the trial
court was without authority to hold a hearing on his motion. Additionally, to the extent that Mr.
Coleman raised issues that were, or could have been, raised on direct appeal, res judicata also
would bar the consideration of those issues. See Calhoun at ¶ 7.
{¶9} In light of the foregoing, we cannot conclude that the trial court erred in denying
Mr. Coleman’s motion to withdraw his guilty plea. Mr. Coleman’s assignments of error are
overruled.
III.
{¶10} The judgment of the Summit County Court of Common Pleas is affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
There were reasonable grounds for this appeal.
We order that a special mandate issue out of this Court, directing the Court of Common
Pleas, County of Summit, State of Ohio, to carry this judgment into execution. A certified copy
of this journal entry shall constitute the mandate, pursuant to App.R. 27.
Immediately upon the filing hereof, this document shall constitute the journal entry of
judgment, and it shall be file stamped by the Clerk of the Court of Appeals at which time the
period for review shall begin to run. App.R. 22(C). The Clerk of the Court of Appeals is
instructed to mail a notice of entry of this judgment to the parties and to make a notation of the
mailing in the docket, pursuant to App.R. 30.
5
Costs taxed to Appellant.
CARLA MOORE
FOR THE COURT
CARR, P. J.
SCHAFER, J.
CONCUR.
APPEARANCES:
TROY W. COLEMAN, pro se, Appellant.
SHERRI BEVAN WALSH, Prosecuting Attorney, and RICHARD S. KASAY, Assistant
Prosecuting Attorney, for Appellee.