State v. Hughes, 2013 Ohio 1037

Hughes was charged with breaking and entering and petty theft; he pled guilty to petty theft under a plea agreement, and the breaking and entering charge was nolled.
Before the plea, the court advised that pleading guilty to petty theft could not result in prison but could lead to six months in local incarceration.
Hughes was sentenced to six months in the Cuyahoga County jail following his guilty plea.
Hughes appeals, arguing the plea was not knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily entered and that Crim.R. 11 was not substantially complied.
Crim.R. 11(C)(2) requires addressing voluntary nature, understanding of charges and penalties, and understanding of waiving constitutional rights; the rule differentiates between constitutional and nonconstitutional rights.
The court held the plea substantially complied with Crim.R. 11(C)(2) and other applicable rules; no contest option was not required to be advised for petty offenses; the plea was valid and the conviction affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the plea was knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently entered	Hughes	Hughes	Yes; substantial compliance found

State v. Veney, 120 Ohio St.3d 176 (2008-Ohio-5200) (strict compliance for constitutional rights, substantial for nonconstitutional)
State v. Nero, 56 Ohio St.3d 106 (1990) (totality of circumstances standard for understanding rights)
State v. Clark, 119 Ohio St.3d 239 (2008-Ohio-3748) (substantial compliance standard for nonconstitutional rights)
State v. Sarkozy, 117 Ohio St.3d 86 (2008-Ohio-509) (plea validity when no motion to withdraw filed)
State v. Dunn, 2010-Ohio-5000 (8th Dist.) (nonconstitutional penalties need not be exact, substantial compliance)
State v. Jones, 2007-Ohio-6093 (Supreme Court) (no contest option not required to be advised for petty offenses)
Cleveland v. Wanzo, 129 Ohio App.3d 664 (1998) (Crim.R. 11(C)(2) rights must be conveyed on the record)