State v. Harvey

Summary

The Eleventh District Court of Appeals of Ohio affirmed the denial of Dominic Michael Harvey’s petition for postconviction relief without a hearing. The court held that Harvey’s ineffective-assistance claim was barred by res judicata because he provided no competent evidence outside the trial record that was unavailable at the time of trial.

Holdings

1. A defendant is not automatically entitled to a hearing on a postconviction-relief petition; the trial court must first determine whether the petition presents substantive grounds for relief.
2. An ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim in a postconviction petition is barred by res judicata when the petitioner does not produce competent, relevant, and material evidence outside the trial record that was unavailable at the time of trial and the claim could have been raised on direct appeal.
3. Harvey failed to establish substantive grounds for relief because he submitted no evidence showing that counsel's alleged ineffectiveness caused his guilty plea to be unknowing, unintelligent, or involuntary.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by denying Harvey's petition for postconviction relief without an evidentiary hearing.
2. Whether Harvey's ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim was barred by res judicata because he failed to provide competent, relevant, and material evidence outside the trial record that was unavailable at the time of trial.
3. Whether Harvey demonstrated substantive grounds for postconviction relief based on an allegation that counsel rendered his guilty plea unknowing, unintelligent, or involuntary.

Disposition

affirmed