Ohio Criminal Appeals Lawyer Blog

A trial judge cannot impose both a prison term and community control (probation) for the same offense. When a judge does so, the sentence is void and contrary to law. A Meigs County judge made this mistake as you can read in State v. Michael Francis, Meigs County Appeal No. 10CA2, 2011-Ohio-4497. Because the sentence was void, the judge should have applied the lower standard for Francis's motion to withdraw his plea even though the motion to withdraw his plea was filed after Francis was sentenced in error.

If you are accused of a crime or have been convicted already, contact me if you can afford to hire a private criminal defense lawyer. Otherwise, contact your county or state public defender to see if they can help.

Contact me 24/7 by sending an email to ohiocriminalappealslawyer@gmail.com

Use caution when you enter a plea agreement with the State. Even if the State agrees to recommend (to the Judge at sentencing) a sentence of "no more than four years," do not think that protects you from being sentenced to a lot more than that. The Judge still has the final say in what you are sentenced to.

That is what happened to David Liskany in Greene County, Ohio. Liskany pleaded guilty to charges that could have landed him in prison for 21 years and could have resulted in him having to pay fines of up to $40,000. The plea agreement was that the prosecutor would recommend a sentence of four years or less. But Liskany was sentenced to 16 years! Some deal.

Liskany tried to get out of his plea, but the trial judge would not let him and the Second District Court of Appeals affirmed that decision. However, Liskany's sentence was reversed and the case was remanded for re-sentencing since the first time around it looked like the trial judge may have been persuaded by a letter written by a Deputy Sheriff which recommended Liskany get a long sentence.

So Liskany is stuck with his plea and he faces up to 21 years in prison. The Judge could sentence Liskany to much more than 4 years on remand as long as he claims he is not doing it based on the Sheriff Deputy's letter.

The lone dissenting judge would have let Liskany out of his plea because the "promise" by the prosecutor to recommend a sentence of no more than 4 years was basically a sham that suckered Liskany into the plea. A plea he is now stuck with. The case is State v. Liskany, 2011-Ohio-4456.

If you are accused of a crime or have been convicted already, contact me if you can afford to hire a private criminal defense lawyer. Otherwise, contact your county or state public defender to see if they can help.

Contact me 24/7 by sending an email to ohiocriminalappealslawyer@gmail.com

The Delaware County Municipal Court apparently figured it could save a bunch of time by informing all the defendants in a group about the rights they were giving up by pleading guilty or no contest. One defendant in the audience on August 11, 2003, who was sitting behind the court railing was informed with everyone else that he may face deportation, exclusion from the U.S., or denied naturalization if he pleads guilty or no contest and he is not a U.S. citizen. This attempt at being efficient with the court's time backfired in one case. Mateo Zabala made a motion to withdraw his plea since he was not addressed personally about the warnings required by R.C. 2943.031. The trial judge denied the motion. The Fifth District Court of Appeals for Delaware County reversed the trial judge and said that a defendant must be personally addressed and the trial judge must make sure the defendant fully understands the immigration consequences of his plea before accepting the plea. The case was sent back to the trial court. State v. Zabala, 2011-Ohio-2947.

If you are accused of a crime or have been convicted already, contact me if you can afford to hire a private criminal defense lawyer. Otherwise, contact your county or state public defender to see if they can help.

Mr. Sasso alleges he pleaded guilty on the condition that he be released on a personal bond that day. When that did not happen, Mr. Sasso told the Judge that he wanted to withdraw his plea because he was promised release on a personal bond. The Judge told Mr. Sasso, "You know what? We're done, Mr. Sasso. Leave." The Eighth District Court of Appeals held that the trial court erred when it failed to consider Sasso's pre-sentence motion to withdraw his guilty plea or to even consider it. The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded "for a hearing and full consideration of the motion to withdraw the plea" as you can read here.