Cleveland v. Tittl
2017 Ohio 9156
Ohio Ct. App.2017Background
- Police responded to a tip of an erratic driver and found Julie Tittl parked at Fulton Beverage; officers observed glossy eyes and slurred speech and arrested her for OVI.
- Tittl refused a chemical test; the record is unclear whether field sobriety tests were performed.
- The City amended the charge to physical control of a motor vehicle (first-degree misdemeanor/petty offense) and defense counsel orally entered a no contest plea on Tittl’s behalf.
- The trial court imposed sentence (fines, suspended jail, six months inactive probation) and terminated the ALS suspension; Tittl later filed timely motions to withdraw her plea, which the court denied.
- On appeal, Tittl argued the court failed to personally advise her of the effect of a no contest plea as required by Crim.R. 11(B)(2) and Traf.R. 10(B); the appellate court stayed execution of sentence, remanded for the plea-withdrawal motions to be decided, then resolved the appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court complied with Crim.R. 11(B)(2)/Traf.R.10(B) in advising the defendant of the effect of a no contest plea to a petty offense | City: Tittl was advised of Crim.R.11 rights on multiple occasions and counsel validly entered the plea | Tittl: Court never personally informed her of the effect of a no contest plea; record lacks the required advisement and she did not personally enter the plea | Court: Reversed — trial court erred by failing to advise Tittl of the effect of a no contest plea and by accepting the plea without the required advisement; case remanded |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Watkins, 788 N.E.2d 635 (Ohio 2003) (discusses trial-court obligations when accepting pleas)
- State v. Jones, 877 N.E.2d 677 (Ohio 2007) (Crim.R.11(E) and required advisements for petty-offense pleas)