[Cite as State v. Walsh, 2017-Ohio-549.]
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO
HAMILTON COUNTY, OHIO
STATE OF OHIO, : APPEAL NO. C-160268
TRIAL NO. C-15TRD-50644
Plaintiff-Appellee, :
O P I N I O N.
vs. :
BRENNEN WALSH, :
Defendant-Appellant. :
Criminal Appeal From: Hamilton County Court Municipal Court
Judgment Appealed From Is: Reversed and Cause Remanded
Date of Judgment Entry on Appeal: February 17, 2017
Joseph T. Deters, Hamilton County Prosecuting Attorney, and Alex Scott Havlin,
Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for Plaintiff-Appellee,
Bryan R. Perkins, for Defendant-Appellant.
O HIO F IRST D ISTRICT C OURT OF A PPEALS
M OCK , Presiding Judge.
{¶1} On November 4, 2015, defendant-appellant Brennen Walsh was
involved in a motor-vehicle accident. As a result of that accident, he was cited for
failing to drive within the marked lanes, in violation of R.C. 4511.33. On December 1,
2015, Walsh requested a continuance, which was granted by the trial court. On
January 12, 2016, Walsh requested a second continuance in order to obtain the
presence of witnesses for trial. While the trial court did not grant the continuance
fully, the trial court did continue the case until that afternoon to allow time to
produce the witnesses. When the case was recalled, Walsh entered a plea of no
contest. Based on that plea, the trial court found him guilty and imposed sentence
accordingly.
{¶2} In his first assignment of error, Walsh claims that the trial court erred
when it failed to advise him of the effect of his no-contest plea. The state concedes
error, and we agree.
{¶3} With regard to petty offenses, Traf.R. 10(D) states that a trial court
“shall not accept [a guilty or no-contest plea] without first informing the defendant
of the effect of the plea of guilty, no contest, or not guilty.” A court complies with the
mandate of Traf.R. 10(D) by “informing the defendant of the information contained
in Traf.R. 10(B).” State v. Watkins, 99 Ohio St.3d 12, 2003-Ohio-2419, 788 N.E.2d
635, syllabus.
{¶4} Traf.R. 10(B) describes the effects of the possible pleas, noting that
“[t]he plea of no contest is not an admission of defendant's guilt, but is an admission
of the truth of the facts alleged in the complaint and such plea or admission shall not
be used against the defendant in any subsequent civil or criminal proceeding.”
Traf.R. 10(B)(2). While “a slight deviation from the text of the rule is permissible,”
the trial court must convey sufficient information so that a defendant “subjectively
2
O HIO F IRST D ISTRICT C OURT OF A PPEALS
understands the implications of his plea and the rights he is waiving.” (Citation
omitted.) State v. Clark, 119 Ohio St.3d 239, 2008-Ohio-3748, 893 N.E.2d 462, ¶ 31.
{¶5} A violation of R.C. 4511.33 is considered a petty offense. See Traf.R.
2(D). In this case, the trial court failed to provide Walsh with any information
relative to his plea. During the colloquy, the following exchange occurred:
Court: Are we proceeding to trial?
Defense Counsel: Your Honor, there’s a plea. No contest to the
allegations. Stipulate the facts.
Court: Insurance?
Prosecutor: Insurance was marked yes, Judge.
Court: And you’ll stipulate to the guilt.
Defense Counsel: Correct.
Court: Finding is guilty.
This colloquy was insufficient to satisfy the notification requirements of Traf.R.
10(D). Therefore, we sustain the first assignment of error.
{¶6} In his second assignment of error, Walsh claims that the trial court
abused its discretion when it denied his second motion for a continuance. This issue
is moot in light of our resolution of the first assignment of error, and we decline to
address it.
{¶7} The judgment of the trial court is reversed, and the cause is
{¶8} remanded with instructions to the trial court to vacate Walsh’s no-
contest plea.
Judgment reversed and cause remanded.
CUNNINGHAM and ZAYAS, JJ., concur.
Please note:
The court has recorded its own entry on the date of the release of this opinion.
3