State v. Kubisen, 2017 Ohio 8781

Defendant Bart Kubisen was indicted on one count of theft (fifth-degree felony) in Lorain County.
Kubisen applied for Intervention In Lieu of Conviction (ILC); the trial court referred him to probation and held an eligibility hearing.
At the hearing Kubisen provided a letter regarding alcohol use; the State objected to his eligibility for ILC on statutory grounds.
The trial court made findings about Kubisen’s waiver of constitutional rights and stated it “accept[ed] the plea,” and admitted him into ILC; the transcript, however, contains no record of Kubisen personally entering a guilty plea in open court.
The State appealed the ILC eligibility decision; the appellate court reversed and remanded because the court never elicited an actual guilty plea from Kubisen as required by Crim.R. 11(C).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Kubisen was eligible for ILC because he failed to file a written assessment and did not show alcohol was a factor	State: Kubisen failed to comply with R.C. 2951.041(B)(4) and (B)(6)	Kubisen: (implicitly) sought ILC based on assessment and alcohol-related information presented at hearing	Court did not reach merits of statutory eligibility due to procedural defect in plea entry; matter reversed and remanded
Whether the trial court validly accepted a guilty plea required before granting ILC	State: The ILC admission was invalid because statutory requirements not met; also challenges procedural adequacy	Kubisen: Trial court treated plea as entered and accepted; counsel stated plea was being withdrawn and changed to guilty	Court held no valid plea was entered—trial court never elicited defendant’s personal guilty plea in open court, so it lacked authority to accept a plea and admit him to ILC

State v. Caudill, 48 Ohio St.2d 342 (1976) (an attorney’s representations and a written document cannot substitute for the court’s personal inquiry of the defendant when taking a plea)