State v. Alexander

[Cite as State v. Alexander, 2020-Ohio-4364.]
STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
)ss: NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
COUNTY OF SUMMIT )
STATE OF OHIO C.A. No. 29605
Appellee
v. APPEAL FROM JUDGMENT
ENTERED IN THE
WILLIAM ALEXANDER COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
COUNTY OF SUMMIT, OHIO
Appellant CASE No. CR 18 12 4101(C)
DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY
Dated: September 9, 2020
HENSAL, Presiding Judge.
{¶1} William Alexander appeals his convictions in the Summit County Court of
Common Pleas. For the following reasons, this Court reverses.
I.
{¶2} In April 2019, Mr. Alexander told the trial court that he desired to plead guilty to
three offenses. The trial court accepted Mr. Alexander’s plea but did not advise him of the
constitutional rights he would be waiving. It sentenced him to a total of 12 years imprisonment.
Mr. Alexander has appealed, arguing that the trial court failed to comply with Criminal Rule
11(C)(2)(c) before accepting his guilty plea.
II.
ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR
THE TRIAL COURT FAILED TO INFORM OR ENGAGE IN ANY DIALOGUE
WITH APPELLANT ALEXANDER REGARDING THE CONSTITUTIONAL
RIGHTS HE WAS WAIVING BY ENTERING A GUILTY PLEA.
2
{¶3} Mr. Alexander argues that the trial court did not strictly comply with Rule
11(C)(2)(c) and orally advise him of the constitutional rights that he would be waiving by pleading
guilty to felony offenses. Although acknowledging that the error is likely attributable to
inadvertence, he argues that the consequence of the oversight is that his plea is invalid, and his
convictions must be vacated.
{¶4} Rule 11(C)(2)(c) provides that, in felony cases, the court “shall not accept a plea of
guilty” without first addressing the defendant personally and
informing the defendant and determining that the defendant understands that by the
plea the defendant is waiving the rights to jury trial, to confront witnesses against
him or her, to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in the defendant's
favor, and to require the state to prove the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable
doubt at a trial at which the defendant cannot be compelled to testify against himself
or herself.
In State v. Veney, 120 Ohio St.3d 176, 2008-Ohio-5200, the Ohio Supreme Court held that “[a]
trial court must strictly comply with Crim.R. 11(C)(2)(c) and orally advise a defendant” that the
plea waives “(1) the right to a jury trial, (2) the right to confront one’s accusers, (3) the right to
compulsory process to obtain witnesses, (4) the right to require the state to prove guilt beyond a
reasonable doubt, and (5) the privilege against compulsory self-incrimination.” Id. at syllabus. If
the court does not comply, “the defendant’s plea is invalid.” Id.{¶5} The State concedes that the trial court failed to inform Mr. Alexander of the
constitutional rights he would be waiving by entering a guilty plea. This Court’s independent
review of the transcript of the plea hearing also reveals that the trial court did not orally inform
Mr. Alexander of the constitutional rights he was waiving, as required under Rule 11(C)(2)(c).
Accordingly, we agree with Mr. Alexander and the State that Mr. Alexander’s guilty plea is
invalid. Mr. Alexander’s assignment of error is sustained.
3
III.
{¶6} Mr. Alexander’s assignment of error is sustained. The judgment of the Summit
County Court of Common Pleas is reversed, and this matter is remanded for further proceedings.
Judgment reversed,
and cause remanded.
There were reasonable grounds for this appeal.
We order that a special mandate issue out of this Court, directing the Court of Common
Pleas, County of Summit, State of Ohio, to carry this judgment into execution. A certified copy
of this journal entry shall constitute the mandate, pursuant to App.R. 27.
Immediately upon the filing hereof, this document shall constitute the journal entry of
judgment, and it shall be file stamped by the Clerk of the Court of Appeals at which time the period
for review shall begin to run. App.R. 22(C). The Clerk of the Court of Appeals is instructed to
mail a notice of entry of this judgment to the parties and to make a notation of the mailing in the
docket, pursuant to App.R. 30.
Costs taxed to Appellee.
JENNIFER HENSAL
FOR THE COURT
SCHAFER, J.
TEODOSIO, J.
CONCUR.
4
APPEARANCES:
NICHOLAS SWYRYDENKO, Attorney at Law, for Appellant.
SHERRI BEVAN WALSH, Prosecuting Attorney, and HEAVEN R. DIMARTINO, Assistant
Prosecuting Attorney, for Appellee.