COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA NO. 59563 STATE OF OHIO : : Plaintiff-appellee : : JOURNAL ENTRY -vs- : AND : OPINION LORETTA CORBIN : : Defendant-appellant : : DATE OF ANNOUNCEMENT OF DECISION: NOVEMBER 7, 1991 CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: Criminal appeal from Court of Common Pleas Case No. CR-241331 JUDGMENT: AFFIRMED. DATE OF JOURNALIZATION: APPEARANCES: For Plaintiff-Appellee: For Defendant-Appellant: STEPHANIE TUBBS JONES, ESQ. DAVID L. DOUGHTEN, ESQ. CUYAHOGA COUNTY PROSECUTOR 2000 Standard Building BY: WINSTON GRAYS, ESQ. 1370 Ontario Street ASSISTANT COUNTY PROSECUTOR Cleveland, Ohio 44113 The Justice Center 1200 Ontario Street Cleveland, Ohio 44113 - 1 - DYKE, J.: Appellant, Loretta Corbin, was indicted on four counts of rape, R.C. 2907.02, four counts of gross sexual imposition, R.C. 2907.05, four counts of felonious sexual penetration, R.C. 2907.12, one count of child endangering, R.C. 2919.22, and four counts of kidnapping, R.C. 2905.01. Appellant pleaded guilty to counts one through four after they were amended to allege sexual battery (R.C. 2907.03). At sentencing defense counsel's oral motion to withdraw the guilty plea was denied. Appellant was sentenced to four consecutive two-year terms. On appeal appellant assigns the following error for review: THE TRIAL COURT ABUSED ITS DISCRETION BY DENYING APPELLANT'S MOTION TO WITHDRAW HER GUILTY PLEA. Appellant contends that the trial judge did not give the motion full and fair consideration and failed to hold a complete hearing. Appellant insists that trial counsel did not tell appellant the possible sentence and that she did not know the offense to which she pled. The transcript of the sentencing hearing reveals that trial counsel stated as follows: [I]t is my understanding at this time that ... based on some information that I gave her regarding the penalty and possible penalty in this case, that she wishes to vacate her previously entered plea of guilty and go to trial. She did not understand the ramifications of the plea agreement since it appears that I didn't clearly advise her and she didn't clearly understand. (Tr. 12.) (Emphasis added.) There is nothing in trial counsel's motion that can be interpreted to assert that appellant did not know the offense to - 2 - which she pled. The trial judge responded by stating that at the plea appellant had told him that she was not promised anything. He then denied the motion. Rather than a promise the motion concerned the possible sentence. At the plea appellant said that she had not been promised anything as an inducement (Tr. 5) and the trial judge correctly stated that the possible penalty for each count was a year, year and a half, two years and a possible $5,000 fine. (Tr. 7). In accordance with Crim. R. 11(C) appellant was told of the rights that she was waiving. There was no abuse of discretion when there was substantial compliance with Crim. R. 11(C). State v. Nero (1990), 56 Ohio St. 3d 106, 108. Judgment affirmed. - 3 - It is ordered that appellee recover of appellant its costs herein taxed. The Court finds there were reasonable grounds for this appeal. It is ordered that a special mandate issue out of this Court directing the Common Pleas Court to carry this judgment into execution. The defendant's conviction having been affirmed, any bail pending appeal is terminated. Case remanded to the trial court for execution of sentence. A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to Rule 27 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure. NAHRA, J. AND HARPER, J. CONCUR. PRESIDING JUDGE ANN DYKE N.B. This entry is made pursuant to the third sentence of Rule 22(D), Ohio Rules of Appellate Procedure. This is an announce- ment of decision (see Rule 26). Ten (10) days from the date hereof, this document will be stamped to indicate journaliza- tion, at which time it will become the judgment and order of the court and time period for review will begin to run. .