State v. Vohs

2025 Ohio 1107 · Ohio Court of Appeals, Fifth Appellate District, Coshocton County · March 28, 2025 · No. 2024CA0020

Summary

This Ohio Court of Appeals opinion affirms the conviction and six-to-nine-year prison sentence of Mark A. Vohs, who pled guilty to second-degree felony aggravated possession of drugs pursuant to a joint recommendation by the prosecution and defense. After granting an untimely appeal, the court reviewed an Anders brief filed by appointed appellate counsel indicating no colorable issues existed. Upon independent examination of the record, the court found the guilty-plea hearing properly conducted under Criminal Rules 11 and 22, and determined that the jointly recommended sentence complied with all statutory mandates. Consequently, the court concluded the appeal was frivolous, granted counsel’s motion to withdraw, and affirmed the trial court’s judgment.

Court
Ohio Court of Appeals, Fifth Appellate District, Coshocton County
Writing for the Court
Craig R. Baldwin; Robert G. Montgomery; David M. Gormley
Jurisdiction
Ohio
Decision date
March 28, 2025
Docket number
2024CA0020
Procedural posture
Appeal from Coshocton County Court of Common Pleas judgment; affirmation of trial court decision.
Precedential value
published
Parties
Mark A. Vohs v. State of Ohio
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

sentencingappellate procedurecriminal procedure

Practice areas

criminal procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the appeal is frivolous under Anders v. California and therefore dismissible.
  2. Whether the sentence is reviewable under R.C. 2953.08(D)(1).

Holdings

  1. The appeal is frivolous; the court may dismiss it and affirm the trial court judgment.
  2. The sentence is not subject to review because it was authorized by law, jointly recommended by the parties, and imposed by the sentencing judge.

Key quotations

The trial judge properly conducted the plea‑change hearing in this felony case on the record, and he addressed at that hearing the constitutional rights that must be discussed, the nature of the charge, the maximum penalties, the effect of a guilty plea and the possibility of an immediate sentence. (¶11)
A sentence imposed upon a defendant is not subject to review under [R.C. 2953.08] if the sentence is authorized by law, has been recommended jointly by the defendant and the prosecution in the case, and is imposed by a sentencing judge. (¶15)

Factual background

Mark A. Vohs was indicted for a second‑degree felony aggravated possession of drugs. He entered a guilty plea after a plea‑change hearing that complied with Criminal Rules 22, 11(C), and 32(A). The parties jointly recommended a prison term of six to nine years, which the trial judge imposed. Vohs later filed an untimely appeal.

Procedural history

Vohs pleaded guilty to aggravated possession of drugs, received a six‑to‑nine‑year sentence pursuant to a joint plea agreement. He filed an untimely notice of appeal; the court appointed counsel filed an Anders brief declaring the appeal frivolous. The State filed a brief; Vohs filed none. The appellate court reviewed the record and affirmed.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…

More from Ohio Ohio Court Of Appeals Fifth Appellate District Coshocton County