Youngstown Daily Legal News

Court rules man failed to show new evidence to change plea

JESSICA SHAMBAUGH
Special to the Legal News
Published: July 29, 2013

A 12th District Court of Appeals panel ruled this week that a man’s motion to withdraw his guilty plea to a 2007 incident of gross sexual imposition was properly denied.

Ryan Hobbs argued he should be permitted to withdraw his guilty plea after finding his alleged victim gave inconsistent statements to police on the day of the incident.

The three-judge appellate panel found both versions of her statement indicated Hobbs had raped her and he failed to show the information that would have caused him to change his plea.

Case summary shows Hobbs began talking to S.B. in an online chat room in 2005. They later met in person and began a relationship.

The couple went on a date in 2007 to Kings Island and then returned to Hobbs’ apartment. At the time Hobbs was 28 and S.B. was 17.

S.B. later told police that she took a shower at Hobbs’ apartment and then laid across his bed while wearing a bathrobe.

She said Hobbs started rubbing her legs and moving his hands upward.

She told him to stop but he inserted his fingers into her vagina and she pushed him off of her.

When S.B. attempted to leave the bedroom Hobbs stopped her, eventually allowing her to go when she banged on the window and screamed for help.

After leaving the room S.B. called 911 and reported the rape.

Hobbs rushed S.B. during the call and hit her, causing her to drop the phone.

When police arrived they took S.B. to the hospital where she told them what happened.

They later went to Hobbs’ apartment and found him with a knife wound to his arm, which he said was because “S.B. had tried to kill him.”

He later admitted that the wound was self-inflicted in an effort to deflect suspicion onto S.B.

The state charged Hobbs with rape, abduction and assault but amended the charges to gross sexual imposition and unlawful restraint as part of a plea deal.

Hobbs pleaded guilty to the reduced charges and was given five years of community control and ordered to register as a Tier I sex offender.

After violating his community control he was sentenced to 12 months in prison, according to procedural history.

Through the Freedom of Information Act, Hobbs later learned that S.B.’s mom was investigated by child services to determine her supervision of S.B. because of the incident.

He also discovered that S.B. originally told police that he had pushed her to the ground and raped her, but later gave more detail about her laying on his bed and him rubbing her legs.

Based on the new information, Hobbs filed a petition for post-conviction relief in 2010.

The Warren County Court of Common Pleas denied that motion and he moved to withdraw his guilty plea in August 2012.

Hobbs argued he would not have pleaded guilty if he had been aware of the inconsistent statements and the child services investigation.

The trial court denied his motion and he appealed to the 12th District.

Hobbs claimed he should be permitted to withdraw his plea because he was unaware of all of the evidence at the time it was entered, meaning it was entered unknowingly.

“A defendant who seeks to withdraw a plea of guilty after the imposition of sentence has the burden of establishing the existence of a manifest injustice,” 12th District Judge Robin Piper wrote for the court.

Hobbs argued that his plea was uninformed because he did not know about the inconsistencies in S.B.’s statements.

The appellate judges, however, found that although the second statement gave more detail, both accounts clearly alleged that Hobbs raped her.

“While the second account given at the hospital had more details, the fact remains that S.B.’s statement that Hobbs raped her did not change,” Piper stated.

The judges also found that the investigation of S.B.’s mother was not relevant to Hobbs’ guilt and did not play a role in the investigation into the girl’s rape.

“Despite Hobbs’ assertion that he would not have pled guilty, the trial court did not believe Hobbs’ testimony,” Piper wrote.

The judges ruled that the decision was within the trial court’s discretion and overruled his assignment of error.

Hobbs further contended the information should have been disclosed to him prior to his plea.

“However, neither the statement that Hobbs rubbed S.B.’s legs nor the investigation into S.B.’s motion was material to the case against Hobbs because there is no reasonable probability that Hobbs would not have pled guilty had the evidence been disclosed to him prior to his plea,” Piper continued.

The judges ruled Hobbs failed to support his claim that he would have changed his plea given the information about the investigation or S.B.’s statements.

Presiding Judge Robert Ringland and Judge Michael Powell joined Piper to affirm the lower court’s ruling.

The case is cited State v. Hobbs, case No. 2013-Ohio-3089.

[Back]