In re D.P.
2017 Ohio 606
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- D.P., a juvenile, was adjudicated delinquent in March 2016 for vandalism (destroying an ankle monitor) and committed to DYS, with the commitment suspended conditioned on probation and program completion.
- D.P. was expelled from successive rehabilitation placements for violent conduct; the State moved to invoke the suspended DYS commitment after an alleged probation violation at a Juvenile Residential Center.
- At the June 22, 2016 probation-violation hearing, D.P. appeared with his father but without counsel; no on-the-record waiver of counsel was obtained and no written waiver for that hearing appears in the record.
- The trial court did not conduct a full Juv.R. 29(D) colloquy about the rights waived by an admission or the consequences of admitting a probation violation, and the transcript does not show a clear on-the-record admission by D.P.
- The juvenile court granted the State’s motion and reimposed commitment to DYS; the appellate court reversed for failure to secure a valid waiver of counsel and failure to comply with Juv.R. 29(D).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether D.P.’s right to counsel was violated at the June 22, 2016 probation-violation hearing | D.P.: Court failed to inform him of right to counsel or obtain a valid on-the-record waiver as required by R.C. 2151.352 and Juv.R. 29 | State: (did not file brief; no contrary evidence offered) | Court: Right to counsel not shown to have been honored or waived on the record; assignment of error sustained |
| Whether trial court complied with Juv.R. 29(D) before accepting an admission to a probation violation | D.P.: Court did not meaningfully advise him of rights he would waive or the consequences of admission; no clear admission was taken | State: (no argument preserved due to non-opposition/absence of brief) | Court: Juv.R. 29(D) colloquy requirements not met; assignment of error sustained |
Key Cases Cited
- In re C.S., 115 Ohio St.3d 267 (Ohio 2007) (standards for juvenile waiver of counsel and Juv.R. 29 compliance)
- In re Anderson, 92 Ohio St.3d 63 (Ohio 2001) (juvenile right to counsel in delinquency proceedings)
- In re Gault, 387 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1967) (constitutional safeguards for juveniles, including right to counsel)
- State v. Gibson, 45 Ohio St.2d 366 (Ohio) (standards for voluntary, knowing, intelligent waiver)
- State v. Walls, 96 Ohio St.3d 437 (Ohio) (criminal safeguards applicable in juvenile delinquency proceedings)
- State v. Brooke, 113 Ohio St.3d 199 (Ohio 2007) (written waiver requirements for serious offenses)
- In re L.A.B., 121 Ohio St.3d 112 (Ohio 2009) (probation revocation is adjudicatory; Juv.R. 29 applies)