2013 Ohio 1984
Ohio Ct. App.2013Background
- Drake charged with theft under R.C. 2913.02(A)(3) in Dec. 2011.
- In June 2012 Drake withdrew not guilty plea and pled guilty as indicted.
- Trial court sentenced Drake to 60 days in jail and one year of community control.
- Drake appeals solely that Crim.R. 11 was not properly followed and that there was no recorded factual basis or stated elements.
- Court held that Crim.R. 11 was substantially complied and no prejudice shown; plea valid.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crim.R. 11 nonconstitutional rights substantial compliance and prejudice | Drake argues failure to inform complete admission and lack of basis | Drake asserts lack of understanding of elements and mental state | Substantial compliance; no prejudice; plea valid. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Griggs, 103 Ohio St.3d 85 (Ohio 2004) (presumed prejudice not shown when guilty plea admits guilt)
- State v. Nero, 56 Ohio St.3d 106 (Ohio 1990) (nonconstitutional rights require prejudice showing)
- State v. Stewart, 51 Ohio St.2d 86 (Ohio 1977) (strict compliance for constitutional rights; substantial for nonconstitutional)
- State v. Veney, 120 Ohio St.3d 176 (Ohio 2008) (prejudice test: would the plea have been made otherwise)
- State v. Snuffer, 2011-Ohio-6430 (Ohio 2011) (no requirement to set forth factual basis; plea admits guilt)
- State v. Whitfield, 2003-Ohio-1504 (Ohio 2003) (elements explanation not required if defendant understands charges)