State v. Felts, 2014 Ohio 2378

Felts was indicted on one count of gross sexual imposition in Ross County, Ohio.
Felts moved to exclude statements by the alleged victim; the trial court denied the motion in limine.
A plea agreement was reached, with Felts agreeing to plead no contest based on a belief he could appeal the in limine ruling.
Both defense counsel and the state treated appellate review of the ruling as available, and the trial court discussed appellate rights at sentencing.
Felts pleaded no contest and was sentenced to one year in prison; bond was continued for appeal.
On appeal, Felts argues the plea was not knowingly intelligent because it was predicated on an erroneous belief about appealability.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was the plea knowingly intelligent?	Felts contends the plea was predicated on the erroneous belief that the in limine ruling was appealable.	Felts argues the plea was entered based on correct understanding of the law and appellate rights.	No contest plea not knowingly intelligent; reversal and remand.

State v. Engle, 74 Ohio St.3d 525 (Ohio 1996) (no contest plea invalid when predicated on appealability of pretrial rulings)
State v. Grubb, 28 Ohio St.3d 199 (Ohio 1986) (motion in limine rulings not appealable; preserve error at trial)
State v. Brown, 38 Ohio St.3d 305 (Ohio 1988) (proper objection required to preserve evidentiary rulings)
Gable v. Gates Mills, 2004-Ohio-5719 (Ohio 2004) (colloquy and sentence reflect misstatements beyond the oral plea)