State v. Smiddy, 2015 Ohio 4200

Charles Smiddy was indicted on multiple sexual-offense charges involving a minor, including rape, gross sexual imposition, and pandering; he initially pled not guilty.
On October 23, 2014 Smiddy pled guilty to two counts of Gross Sexual Imposition, one count of Pandering Sexually Oriented Matter Involving a Minor, and one count of Pandering Obscenity Involving a Minor.
In exchange, the State dismissed the remaining charges/specifications and agreed to a presentence investigation.
The written plea form included a “Waiver of Rights” describing trial rights, including a (written) reference to the right to a jury trial.
At the oral plea colloquy the court informed Smiddy he had “the right to a trial” and explained the trial would require proof beyond a reasonable doubt and a unanimous jury verdict, but the court did not explicitly say the words “jury trial.”
The trial court accepted the plea, later imposed consecutive maximum sentences totaling 26 years, and Smiddy appealed claiming the court failed to comply with Crim.R. 11 by not orally advising him he was waiving his constitutional right to a jury trial.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court failed to strictly comply with Crim.R. 11(C)(2)(c) by omitting the word “jury” when advising of the right to a trial	The State argued the colloquy adequately informed Smiddy of the trial rights and any ambiguity is resolved by the written plea form	Smiddy argued the court did not orally inform him he was waiving his constitutional right to a jury trial because the court said only “the right to a trial” and omitted “jury”	Court affirmed: the colloquy sufficiently conveyed the right to a jury trial (an average person would understand a trial requiring a unanimous jury verdict is a jury trial), and any possible ambiguity is resolved by the written plea agreement

State v. Veney, 897 N.E.2d 621 (Ohio 2008) (requires strict or literal compliance with Crim.R. 11(C)(2)(c) for advising defendants of constitutional rights)
State v. Barker, 953 N.E.2d 826 (Ohio 2011) (an ambiguous oral plea colloquy may be clarified by other parts of the record, including the written plea agreement)