State v. Rondon
2011 Ohio 4938
Ohio Ct. App.2011Background
- Rondon was indicted in October 2009 on four counts, including two counts of carrying concealed weapons, operating without a valid license, and speeding.
- At the change of plea, the State indicated a no contest plea would be entered to preserve a constitutional challenge for appeal.
- Rondon pleaded no contest, proffered a constitutional challenge after the plea, and was sentenced to 12 months, suspended on two years of community control.
- Rondon appealed raising two assignments of error contending RC 2923.12 and the licensing provisions violate the US Constitution and equal protection.
- The trial court did not rule on the constitutional issues; the record shows Rondon believed he could raise the issue on appeal despite the lack of a trial-court ruling.
- The court held the conviction/plea was conditioned on an erroneously understood ability to challenge the statutes, vacating the plea and remanding for new proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Constitutionality of RC 2923.12 under II and XIV | Rondon argues the statute is unconstitutional. | State maintains no preserved ruling on the issue for review. | Issue not preserved; but plea vacated due to erroneous conditioning; remanded for new proceedings. |
| Indigent licensing provisions and equal protection | Rondon asserts indigents lack fee/wavier protections, violating EP | State contends no preserved ruling and no impact on decision | Issue not preserved; conviction vacated and remanded due to erroneous plea conditioning. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Holmes, 9th Dist. No. 22938, 2006-Ohio-2175 (Ohio) (preservation of arguments and trial court ruling requirement)
- State v. Long, 53 Ohio St.2d 91, 1978 (Ohio) (need for proper trial-court consideration of issues)
- State v. Smiley, 9th Dist. No. 23815, 2008-Ohio-1915 (Ohio) (plain-error review and preservation considerations)
- State v. Engle, 74 Ohio St.3d 525, 1996 (Ohio) (voluntariness of plea and aiding misapprehension by defendant)
- State v. Smith, 9th Dist. No. 08CA009338, 2008-Ohio-6942 (Ohio) (when plea is not knowingly made based on misadvice, remand and new trial)