Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

State v. Osborn

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eighth District, Cuyahoga

June 13, 2019

STATE OF OHIO, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
TREVON A. OSBORN, Defendant-Appellant.

          Civil Appeal from the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Case No. CR-16-606185-A

          Michael C. O'Malley, Cuyahoga County Prosecuting Attorney, and Mary M. Frey, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.

          Paul A Mancino, Jr., for appellant.

          JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION

          LARRY A JONES, SR., J.

         {¶ 1} Defendant-appellant Trevon Osborn ("Osborn") appeals from the trial court's June 2018 findings of fact and conclusions of law denying his petition for postconviction relief without a hearing. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.

         Procedural History

         {¶ 2} In May 2016, Osborn was charged in a 12-count indictment. After pretrial negotiations with the state, in September 2016, Osborn pleaded guilty to the following amended counts of the indictment: Count 1, aggravated burglary with a three-year firearm specification; Count 3, aggravated robbery with a three-year firearm specification; Count 4, grand theft; Count 5, theft/aggravated theft; Counts 6 and 8, kidnapping; Counts 7 and 9, aggravated robbery; Count 11, improperly handling firearms in a motor vehicle; and Count 12, impersonation of certain officers. All the counts contained a forfeiture specification for a Ruger 9 mm firearm. The remaining counts of the indictment were dismissed.

         {¶ 3} Sentencing occurred in October 2016. The defense and state agreed that Counts 3 through 6 and Counts 7 and 8 merged; the state elected to proceed on Counts 3 and 7, aggravated robbery with a three-year firearm specification and aggravated robbery, respectively. The trial court sentenced Osborn to an aggregate 15-year prison term that included consecutive sentences.

         {¶ 4} Osborn filed a direct appeal, challenging his plea and sentence. This court affirmed the conviction and sentence. State v. Osborn, 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 105196, 2017-Ohio-8228.

         {¶ 5} In December 2017, he filed a petition for postconviction relief, contending that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate the charges, which forced him to plea. Osborn also contended that his trial counsel informed him that he would only receive a nine-year prison sentence. He supported his petition with a police incident report relative to the offenses, an indictment from another case, and his own affidavit. The court denied the petition, and in June 2018, issued findings of fact and conclusions of law. This appeal follows, with Osborn asserting the following two assignments of error:

Defendant was denied due process of law when his post-conviction petition was denied without a hearing.
Defendant was denied due process of law when he was not granted relief on his post-conviction petition.

         Law and Analysis

         Postconviction Relief

         {¶ 6} Postconviction relief is governed by R.C. 2953.21, which provides in relevant part as follows:

(A)(1)(a) Any person who has been convicted of a criminal offense * * * and who claims that there was such a denial or infringement of the person's rights as to render the judgment void or voidable under the Ohio Constitution or the Constitution of the United States * * *, may file a petition in the court that imposed sentence, stating the grounds for relief relied upon, and asking the court to vacate or set aside the judgment or sentence or to grant other appropriate relief. The petitioner may file a supporting affidavit and other documentary evidence in support of the claim for relief.
* * *
(D) Before granting a hearing on a petition filed under division (A) of this section, the court shall determine whether there are substantive grounds for relief. In making such a determination, the court shall consider, in addition to the petition, the supporting affidavits, and the documentary evidence, all the files and records pertaining to the proceedings against the petitioner, including, but not limited to, the indictment, the court's ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.