Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eleventh District, Geauga
Appeal from the Geauga County Court of Common Pleas. Case No.
2017 C 000001.
R. Flaiz, Geauga County Prosecutor, and Nicholas A. Burling,
Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, Courthouse Annex, (For
Raymond A. Miller, pro se, (Defendant-Appellant).
TIMOTHY P. CANNON, J.
Appellant, Raymond A. Miller, appeals an entry of the Geauga
County Court of Common Pleas, denying his Petition to Vacate
or Set Aside Judgment of Conviction or Sentence. The judgment
is affirmed in part and reversed in part, and the matter is
remanded for further proceedings consistent with this
On July 12, 2017, pursuant to a plea agreement, appellant
pled guilty to five felony charges and was sentenced to
twenty years in prison. Following the sentencing hearing,
appellant filed a pro se motion to withdraw his guilty plea,
alleging ineffective assistance of counsel, which the trial
Appellant noticed a direct appeal from the judgment of
conviction and the denial of his motion to withdraw his
guilty plea. State v. Miller, 11th Dist. Geauga No.
2017-G-0136, 2018-Ohio-4379. In his first assignment of
error, appellant asserted he was deprived of his
constitutional right to the effective assistance of counsel.
Id. at ¶12. Specifically, he argued ineffective
assistance due to counsel's (1) lack of motion practice
and waiver of appellant's speedy trial rights; (2)
failure to alert the trial court of a "near" error
regarding postrelease control; and (3) informing appellant
that his wife/co-defendant would be charged with contempt of
court if she refused to testify against him, which resulted
in appellant feeling "threatened" and
"obligated" to plead guilty. Id. at
This court affirmed the trial court's judgments on
October 29, 2018. Id. at
We concluded appellant's first two arguments under his
ineffective assistance of counsel claim were without merit.
Id. at ¶16-17. With regard to the third
argument, we held, in pertinent part, as follows:
Finally, the merits of this argument, and appellee's
response, largely rely on alleged conversations that took
place between appellant and defense counsel, as well as
agreements allegedly made by appellant's wife as part of
her own plea agreement. These types of matters that are de
hors the trial court record cannot be addressed in this
appeal. An allegation that appellant's guilty plea was
not voluntary because defense counsel allegedly
'threatened' him to plead guilty during a private
conversation must be raised in a petition for post-conviction
Id. at ¶18, citing State v. Price,
11th Dist. Trumbull No. 2013-T-0088, 2015-Ohio-944, ¶29,
and State v. Hathaway, 2d Dist. Greene No.
2014-CA-13, 2015-Ohio-5488, ¶18.
On November 26, 2018, appellant appealed this court's
decision to the Supreme Court of Ohio. The Supreme Court
declined jurisdiction on February 6, 2019.
On November 8, 2018, prior to filing his appeal in the
Supreme Court, appellant petitioned the trial court, pro se,
in a document entitled, "Petition to Vacate or Set Aside
Judgment of Conviction or Sentence (Evidentiary Hearing
Requested)." The first paragraph explains that appellant
"petitions this Court for Post-Conviction relief
pursuant to R.C. 2953.21 to vacate petitioner's
conviction on the basis that it is void and/or voidable under
the United States and/or Ohio Constitution. Petitioner sets
forth below operative facts to establish substantive grounds
for relief, R.C. 2953.21(C)." Appellant set forth two
claims for relief:
[1.] Mr. Miller's Conviction and Sentence are void and/or
voidable. Mr. Miller was denied his Constitutional Rights to
Effective Assistance of Counsel when defense counsel coerced
Mr. Miller into entering a guilty plea with the continuous
threats of Miller's wife/co-defendant testifying against
Miller. This is a violation of Mr. Miller's Sixth
Amendment, U.S. ...