State v. HopkinsState v. Hopkins
OPINION
{¶ 1} Richard Hopkins entered a plea of no contest to petty theft, a first degree misdemeanor [but petty offense per
{¶ 2} On appeal, Hopkins advances two assignments of error.
{¶ 3} “The trial court erred in failing to inform appellant of the effect of his plea in violation of
{¶ 4} The parties appear to agree that this assignment is governed by
{¶ 5} “In misdemeanor cases involving petty offenses, the court may refuse to accept a plea of guilty or no contest, and shall not accept such pleas without first informing the defendant of the effect of the plea of guilty, no contest, and not guilty.”
{¶ 6} Hopkins contends under this assignment that the trial court failed to comply with
{¶ 7} The State does not address this contention but rather argues that the trial court adequately explained the effect of a no contest plea, a contention that we do not understand Hopkins to dispute.
{¶ 8} While a literal reading of
{¶ 9} Hopkins asserts that had the trial court advised him of the effect of a not guilty plea, the court would necessarily have had to inform him of the rights described in
{¶ 10} We believe that this interpretation of
{¶ 11} “If
{¶ 12} Secondly, despite the conjunctive language of
{¶ 13} The first assignment is overruled.
{¶ 14} “The trial court erred by accepting a no contest plea from appellant that was not voluntary, and in violation of
{¶ 15} Hopkins complains under this assignment that the trial court failed to determine that he understood the nature of the offense to which he pleaded no contest, and that the record demonstrates that the plea was involuntary.
{¶ 16} It should be noted that unlike
{¶ 17} That said, the following dialogue occurred among the trial court, Hopkins, and his counsel:
{¶ 18} “* * *Theft is a first degree misdemeanor. It does carry up to six months in jail, up to a $1,000 fine. And how is Mr. Hopkins going to plead to that charge today?
{¶ 19} “MR. MORSE: No contest, your Honor.
{¶ 20} “THE COURT: Are you — no contest means you‘re not admitting you‘re guilty, but you‘re also not contesting the facts contained in the Complaint and Affidavit. And, based on those facts, the Court would probably find you guilty. Do you understand that? You have to answer out loud.
{¶ 21} “THE DEFENDANT: Yes.
{¶ 22} “THE COURT: All right. And you‘re voluntarily pleading no contest?
{¶ 23} “THE DEFENDANT: Yes, your Honor.
{¶ 24} “THE COURT: I accept your no contest plea.
{¶ 25} “* * *
{¶ 26} “Based on the facts contained in the Complaint and Affidavit, I do make a finding of guilty.” (Tr. of Proceedings, March 15, 2002, at p. 10-11.)
{¶ 27} On his own behalf, Hopkins then complained of numerous physical problems and manic depression, and claimed he was not stealing the $300 DVD he was charged with stealing, but only exited one of two sets of double doors to access an ATM. (One of the incident reports before the trial court stated Hopkins’ credit card had been “put into collections.“)
{¶ 28} Despite Hopkins’ protest of innocence and his apparently poor state of health, this record does not preclude a reasonable determination that Hopkins’ plea of no contest was nevertheless voluntary.
{¶ 29} The second assignment is overruled.
{¶ 30} The judgment will be affirmed.