[Cite as State v. Johnson, 2016-Ohio-4631.]

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO 

TENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT 

State of Ohio, : 

 Plaintiff-Appellee, : No. 16AP-173 

 (C.P.C. No. 90CR-1199)

v. : 

 (ACCELERATED CALENDAR) 

Tracey L. Johnson, : 

 Defendant-Appellant. : 

 

D E C I S I O N 

Rendered on June 28, 2016 

 

On brief: Ron O'Brien, Prosecuting Attorney, and Laura R. 

Swisher, for appellee. 

On brief: Tracey L. Johnson, pro se. 

 

APPEAL from the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas 

LUPER SCHUSTER, J. 

{¶ 1} Defendant-appellant, Tracey L. Johnson, appeals from a judgment of the 

Franklin County Court of Common Pleas denying his "motion to vacate void guilty plea." 

For the following reasons, we affirm.

{¶ 2} In 1990, Johnson pleaded guilty to one count of drug abuse, a fourth-degree 

felony. The trial court sentenced Johnson to one year in prison for the conviction. In 

October 1991, the trial court stayed the remainder of Johnson's prison sentence and 

placed him on probation for three years. In 1994, the trial court discharged Johnson from 

probation. 

{¶ 3} In February 2015, Johnson filed a "Motion to find the guilty plea and the 

judgment entry void." In March 2015, the trial court summarily denied Johnson's 

February 2015 motion. In June 2015, Johnson moved for leave to file a delayed appeal 
No. 16AP-173 2 

from the trial court's March 2015 judgment. In August 2015, this court denied Johnson's 

motion for leave. 

{¶ 4} In November 2015, Johnson filed a "motion to vacate void guilty plea" in the 

trial court, arguing that he was not properly notified of the "possibility of a driver['s] 

license suspension as part of the maximum penalty." In January 2016, the trial court 

summarily denied Johnson's November 2015 motion. Johnson appeals from that denial 

and assigns the following error for our review:

The trial court erred as a matter of law in not finding the 

guilty plea void, where the trial court never advised or 

imposed the mandatory driver's license suspension in 

violation of Crim.R. 11(c)(2). 

{¶ 5} In his sole assignment of error, Johnson argues the trial court erred in not 

vacating his guilty plea because the trial court did not impose or advise him of the 

mandatory driver's license suspension. Johnson's assignment of error is without merit. 

{¶ 6} The issue before this court is whether the trial court erred in denying 

Johnson's November 2015 motion. In that motion, Johnson moved to vacate his guilty 

plea on the alleged basis that the trial court violated Crim.R. 11(C)(2) by not properly 

notifying him of the possible penalty of a driver's license suspension. In this appeal, 

however, Johnson argues that the trial court should have permitted him to withdraw his 

guilty plea because the trial court did not properly notify him of the possible penalty of a 

driver's license suspension, and because the trial court erred by not imposing a driver's 

license suspension. Because Johnson did not argue in support of his November 2015 

motion that his guilty plea was invalid because the trial court did not impose a driver's 

license suspension, that argument is waived and will not be considered in this appeal. 

See, e.g., Harding Pointe, Inc. v. Ohio Dept. of Job & Family Servs., 10th Dist. No. 13AP258, 2013-Ohio-4885, ¶ 43 ("A party who fails to raise an argument in the trial court 

waives the right to raise it on appeal."). 

{¶ 7} Johnson's argument that the trial court erred by not permitting him to 

withdraw his guilty plea because he was not informed of the possibility of a driver's license 

suspension is meritless. Pursuant to Crim.R. 32.1, a "motion to withdraw a plea of guilty 

or no contest may be made only before sentence is imposed; but to correct manifest 

injustice the court after sentence may set aside the judgment of conviction and permit the 
No. 16AP-173 3 

defendant to withdraw his or her plea." Thus, a "trial court may allow the post-sentence 

withdrawal of a plea of guilty only to correct a manifest injustice." State v. Aleshire, 5th 

Dist. No. 2011-CA-73, 2012-Ohio-16, ¶ 23. Johnson cannot demonstrate a manifest 

injustice. Even if he was not informed of the possibility of a driver's license suspension 

sanction, that lack of knowledge was inconsequential because the trial court did not 

suspend his driver's license. 

{¶ 8} Because the trial court did not err in denying Johnson's "motion to vacate 

void guilty plea," Johnson's sole assignment of error is overruled. Having overruled 

Johnson's sole assignment of error, we affirm the judgment of the Franklin County Court 

of Common Pleas. 

Judgment affirmed. 

TYACK and BRUNNER, JJ., concur.