State v. Driffin

Citations

• 2021 Ohio 2264

Syllabus

Crim.R. 11 guilty plea knowingly, intelligently, and voluntary constitutional guarantees waiving constitutional rights and prejudice. Due process requires that a defendant's plea be made knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily otherwise, the defendant's plea is invalid. When a trial court fails to explain the constitutional rights that a defendant waives by pleading guilty or no contest, we presume that the plea was entered involuntarily and unknowingly, and no showing of prejudice is required. To aid our analysis, the Ohio Supreme Court in State v. Dangler, 162 Ohio St.3d 1, 2020-Ohio-2765, 164 N.E.3d 286, provided a three-question test namely: (1) has the trial court complied with the relevant provision of [Crim.R. 11]? (2) if the [trial] court has not complied fully with the rule, is the purported failure of a type that excuses a defendant from the burden of demonstrating prejudice? and (3) if a showing of prejudice is required, has the defendant met that burden? Although the trial court incorrectly stated, at the plea hearing, that appellant could get up to 25 percent of earned reduction of minimum prison term (\ERMPT\) or \good-time\ credit under the Reagan Tokes Law, if he behaved in prison, appellant was not prejudiced. Our review reveals that appellant's objective was to strike an agreement whereby he would serve no more than eight years. The trial court stated that it would impose a sentence of ten and one-half years and that there was significant discussion that, with the almost one year that appellant had been in jail, along with the 15 percent good-time credit, he would reach that objective if he behaved well. Appellant is unable to establish any prejudice by the trial court's misstatement, because the plea agreement struck with the state and the sentence the trial court imposed allowed appellant to achieve his stated objective of serving eight years. There is no evidence that appellant would not have pled guilty, but for the trial court's misstatement