Court of appeals upholds local court's decision in sentencing matter

The Ohio Fourth District Court of Appeals has upheld the decision of a Highland County trial court in a Springfield's man appeal of his convictions of attempted gross sexual imposition and importuning.

According to the court's decision, filed online this week, Robert G. Layne acted as his own attorney in appeal his 2009 convictions.

Layne was indicted in 2008 in Highland County Common Pleas Court on a second-degree felony charge of attempted rape; attempted gross sexual imposition, a felony of the fourth degree; and attempted kidnapping, a felony of the second degree. He pleaded guilty in 2009 to charges of importuning, a felony of the third degree, and attempted gross sexual imposition, a felony of the fourth degree. The remaining charges were dismissed as a result of the plea agreement.

He was sentenced four years in prison on the importuning charge, and one year in prison on the attempted gross sexual imposition charge, to be served consecutively, for a total of five years in prison.

Layne submitted one assignment of error in the appeal, alleging that the trial court erred when it denied a defense motion to withdraw his guilty plea, following his sentencing.

The court of appeals wrote in the judgment that, "Because (Layne) has failed to demonstrate any error, let alone plain error, with regard to his sentencing, he has also failed to prove a manifest injustice for purposes of withdrawing his plea."

The state was represented by Highland County Prosecutor Anneka Collins in the appeal. Layne acted as his own attorney in the appeal.

The court of appeals noted that the charges all involved the same victim and "occurred during a single court of events ... "There is no indication in the record (Layne) raised the issue of allied offenses of similar import at the plea or sentencing phases."

Nearly two years after he entered the guilty pleas and was sentenced Layne, acting as his own attorney, entered a motion to withdraw the pleas. That motion was denied in Highland County Common Pleas Court, and Layne subsequently filed the appeal.

According to the court of appeal, "a trial court may only grant a post-sentence motion to withdraw a guilty plea only to correct a manifest injustice. 'Manifest injustice' is an extremely high standard, which permits a defendant to withdraw his guilty plea only in extraordinary cases. A defendant who seeks to withdraw a guilty plea bears the burden of establishing a manifest injustice."

Layne argued in the appeal that he should have been permitted to withdraw his plea because "his sentence was contrary to law in that he was ordered to serve consecutive sentences for allied offenses of similar import. We note, as did the trial court in denying (Layne's) motion, that (he) did not file his motion to withdraw his guilty pleas until approximately 21 months after he entered them.

"We cannot conclude that the trial court abused its discretion in denying (Layne's) motion to withdraw his guilty pleas," the court wrote in the judgment.

The court of appeals further found that the charges of attempted gross sexual imposition and importuning would not have been allied offenses, because, "Appellant was convicted of soliciting the victim by means of a telecommunications device, an element which certainly does not align with the crime of gross sexual imposition ... As such, the trial court’s imposition of consecutive sentences for these offenses was not contrary to law and therefore, no plain error has occurred. Likewise, having found no plain error, we cannot conclude that Appellant demonstrated a manifest injustice. As a result, we cannot conclude that the trial court abused its discretion in denying Appellant’s motion to withdraw his guilty pleas."