2018 Ohio 1340
Ohio Ct. App.2018Background
- On August 2, 2016, deputies stopped Santino Hopkins for an alleged failure to signal; deputies smelled burning marijuana and Hopkins could not produce his driver’s license or rental agreement.
- A frisk revealed a large sum of cash and a hard object in Hopkins’s pocket; Hopkins admitted the hard object contained drugs.
- A subsequent search produced multiple bags of crack/cocaine or heroin and $2,445 in cash; Hopkins was arrested and indicted on multiple drug counts and forfeiture specifications.
- Hopkins moved to suppress the stop and resulting evidence but withdrew the motion at the suppression hearing and accepted a plea agreement: he pled guilty to Count 1 (trafficking), amended Count 4 (attempted possession), and Count 6 (possession); several counts were dismissed.
- The trial court imposed consecutive prison terms totaling 70 months, post-release control, and forfeiture of $2,445; Hopkins filed a delayed appeal.
- Appointed counsel filed a no-merit (Anders/Toney) brief; the appellate court found a Crim.R. 11(C)(2)(c) deficiency (court did not orally inform Hopkins of the jury-trial waiver) and granted counsel’s motion to withdraw, appointing new counsel to brief the case.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the change-of-plea complied with Crim.R. 11(C)(2)(c) (constitutional rights explained) | The State relied on the written plea and the trial court’s oral colloquy generally covering rights to show compliance. | Hopkins argued the court failed to orally inform him of all Crim.R. 11(C)(2)(c) rights (specifically jury trial), so strict compliance was lacking. | The court held the trial court did not strictly comply because it failed to orally explain the jury-trial waiver; reliance on the written plea was insufficient. |
| Whether appointed counsel properly moved to withdraw under Anders/Toney | The State implicitly maintained the appeal could be addressed under the no-merit procedure. | Counsel argued the appeal was frivolous and filed a no-merit (Toney) brief and motion to withdraw. | The court granted counsel’s motion to withdraw under Toney and ordered new counsel appointed to file a brief. |
| Scope of appellate review after guilty plea | The State limited issues by plea; review is therefore confined to plea and sentence validity. | Hopkins’ appeal (via appointed counsel) raised plea/sentence scrutiny under Crim.R. 11 and sentencing law. | The court limited its review to plea and sentence and found the plea colloquy deficient as to Crim.R. 11(C)(2)(c). |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967) (procedure when counsel believes appeal is frivolous)
- State v. Toney, 23 Ohio App.2d 203 (Ohio Ct. App. 1970) (local procedure for court-appointed counsel to withdraw when appeal is frivolous)
- State v. Barker, 129 Ohio St.3d 472 (Ohio 2011) (strict compliance required for Crim.R. 11 on constitutional rights, but substantive explanation may suffice if record shows understanding)
- State v. Veney, 120 Ohio St.3d 176 (Ohio 2008) (trial court cannot rely solely on written plea to satisfy Crim.R. 11(C)(2)(c))