State v. Adams
2011 Ohio 2662
Ohio Ct. App.2011Background
- Adams was indicted in Cuyahoga County on five counts: kidnapping, rape, felonious assault, domestic violence, and endangering children.
- Plea agreement amended count 2 from rape to gross sexual imposition and count 3 from felonious assault to child endangering; Adams pled guilty to the amended counts and others were dismissed.
- Sentencing on June 28, 2010 imposed consecutive terms of five years (Count 2) and two years (Count 3), with a mandatory five-year postrelease control period.
- The court also ordered Adams to pay court costs at sentencing.
- Adams appealed alleging: (1) failure to inform about potential community service for nonpayment of costs, (2) ineffective assistance of counsel for not objecting, and (3) an uninformed guilty plea due to improper briefing on compulsory process and maximum penalties.
- The court sustained Adams’ first assignment, reversed on remand for proper notification regarding court costs; the second assignment was moot; the third assignment was overruled.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether failure to notify about possible community service requires relief | Adams argues trial court violated R.C. 2947.23(A)(1). | Adams contends lack of notice tainted plea and sentencing. | First assignment sustained; remand for proper costs notification. |
| Ineffective assistance for not objecting to costs notification | Adams claims counsel failed to object to error. | Counsel’s performance cannot be evaluated in light of remand for costs notice. | Moot due to sustaining first assignment. |
| Whether plea was knowing, voluntary, and intelligent regarding compulsory process and maximum penalties | Adams argues improper Crim.R. 11(C) advisement affected knowingness of plea. | Adams contends the court inadequately informed about compulsory process and maximum penalties. | Plea held to be valid; assignment overruled. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Cardamone, 8th Dist. No. 94405, 2011-Ohio-818 (8th Dist. 2011) (remand for proper court-costs notification when required notice is missing)
- State v. Veney, 120 Ohio St.3d 176, 897 N.E.2d 621 (Supreme Court, 2008) (strict vs. substantial compliance; nonconstitutional Crim.R. 11(C) review)
- State v. Ballard, 66 Ohio St.2d 473, 423 N.E.2d 115 (Supreme Court, 1981) (strict compliance concept for constitutional rights under Crim.R. 11(C))
- State v. Cardwell, 8th Dist. No. 92796, 2009-Ohio-6827 (8th Dist. 2009) (Crim.R. 11(C) substantial compliance; totality of circumstances)
- State v. Joseph, 125 Ohio St.3d 76, 2010-Ohio-954 (Supreme Court, 2010) (costs are not punishment; not counted as ‘maximum penalty’ under Crim.R. 11(C))