State v. Klingsbergs
2011 Ohio 6509
Ohio Ct. App.2011Background
- Klingsbergs was stopped for speeding on July 4, 2010 in Wayne County and cited under R.C. 4511.21(D) and charged with R.C. 4511.19(A)(1)(a) and (A)(1)(h) due to intoxication.
- At arraignment, Klingsbergs proceeded pro se and pled no contest to two first-degree misdemeanors and one minor misdemeanor.
- The magistrate recommended a sentence; the trial court adopted the magistrate’s recommendation.
- Klingsbergs, through counsel, moved to withdraw the plea; the trial court denied the motion without hearing.
- Klingsbergs appealed the judgments (September 15, 2010 entry and September 27, 2010 denial) raising two assignments of error; the appellate court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was the plea validly made given lack of information on suspension impact? | Klingsbergs argues Crim.R. 11(C)(2) required disclosure of suspension consequences. | Klingsbergs contends the court should have informed him of mandatory suspension effects. | Assignment I overruled; no requirement to disclose the suspension effect for petty offenses under Jones. |
| Did the trial court abuse its discretion by denying the post-sentence motion to withdraw plea without a hearing? | Klingsbergs asserts denial without hearing was an abuse of discretion. | State asserts no manifest injustice shown and court may deny without a hearing. | Assignment II overruled; no manifest injustice shown; no mandatory hearing required. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Jones, 116 Ohio St.3d 211 (2007-Ohio-6093) (Crim.R. 11 differences for petty offenses; inform of the plea’s effect)
- State v. Higby, 2011-Ohio-4996 (9th Dist. No. 10CA0054) (informing of plea effect under Crim.R. 11(E) for petty offenses)
- State v. McKinney, 2006-Ohio-5364 (9th Dist. No. 06CA0031-M) (motion to withdraw plea post-sentence; no hearing required if no manifest injustice)