COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA NOS. 70328 & 70329 STATE OF OHIO, : ACCELERATED DOCKET : : JOURNAL ENTRY Plaintiff-Appellee : : AND v. : : OPINION LEMMIE S. WILSON, : : PER CURIAM : Defendant-Appellant : DATE OF ANNOUNCEMENT OF DECISION: NOVEMBER 27, 1996 CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: Criminal appeals from Common Pleas Court Case Nos. CR-289330 and CR-297346 JUDGMENT: AFFIRMED. DATE OF JOURNALIZATION: APPEARANCES: For plaintiff-appellee: Rebecca J. Maleckar Assistant County Prosecutor The Justice Center - 8th Floor 1200 Ontario Street Cleveland, Ohio 44113 For defendant-appellant: Anthony A. Cox P.O. Box 6002 Hudson, Ohio 44236 -2- PER CURIAM: On June 8, 1996, appellant pleaded guilty to reduced charges of two counts of attempted burglary in case no. CR-289330 and CR- 29736. On June 28, 1996, appellant moved to withdraw his pleas pursuant to Crim.R. 32.1. The court held a hearing and denied appellant's motion. Appellant's sole assignment of error reads: THE TRIAL COURT ABUSED ITS DISCRETION IN OVERRULING APPELLANT'S MOTION TO WITHDRAW HIS GUILTY PLEAS. In State v. Xie (1992), 62 Ohio St.3d 521, 584 N.E.2d 715, the Ohio Supreme Court held: A defendant does not have an absolute right to withdraw a guilty plea prior to sentencing. A trial court must conduct a hearing to determine whether there is a reasonable and legitimate basis for the withdrawal of the plea. The decision to grant or deny a presentence motion to withdraw a guilty plea is within the sound discretion of the trial court. (Syllabus.) A ruling which is not "unreasonable, arbitrary, or unconscionable" must be affirmed. Id. 62 Ohio St.3d at 527; 584 N.E.2d at 719. (quoting State v. Adams (1980), 62 Ohio St.2d 151, 157, 404 N.E.2d 144, 149). The court did not act unreasonably, arbitrarily, or unconscionably in denying appellant's motion, where appellant engaged in a lengthy plea bargaining process, entered a knowing, intelligent, and voluntary plea, and decided to withdraw his plea only after learning he would not be likely to receive probation. See, e.g, State v. Sabatino (1995), 102 Ohio App.3d 483, 487, 657 -3- N.E.2d 527, 530. (A mistaken belief as to the consequence of a plea is insufficient to warrant withdrawal of the plea.) Judgment affirmed. -4- 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. ANN DYKE, PRESIDING JUDGE JOSEPH J. NAHRA, JUDGE JOHN T. PATTON, JUDGE N.B. This entry is an announcement of the court's decision. See App.R. 22(B), 22(D) and 26(A); Loc.App.R. 27. This decision will be journalized and will become the judgment and order of the court pursuant to App.R. 22(E) unless a motion for reconsideration with supporting brief, per App.R. 26(A), is filed within ten (10) days of the announcement of the court's decision. The time period for review by the Supreme Court of Ohio shall begin to run upon the journalization of this court's announcement of decision by the .