Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

State v. Rodriquez

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Third District, Defiance

April 10, 2017

STATE OF OHIO, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,
v.
SCOTTY RODRIQUEZ, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

         Appeal from Defiance County Common Pleas Court Trial Court No. 15-CR-12330

          Mary Catherine O'Neill and Bret Jordan for Appellant.

          Russell R. Herman for Appellee.

          OPINION

          WILLAMOWSKI, J.

         {¶1} Defendant-appellant Scotty Rodriquez ("Rodriquez') brings this appeal from the judgment of the Court of Common Pleas of Defiance County finding him guilty after he entered a no contest plea and for imposing consecutive sentences. Rodriquez also claims that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel. For the reasons set forth below, the judgment is affirmed.

         {¶2} On August 13, 2015, the Defiance County Grand Jury indicted Rodriquez on three counts of trafficking in cocaine in violation of R.C. 2925.03(A)(1)(C)(4). Doc. 1. Rodriquez entered pleas of not guilty to all of the charges. Doc. 6. On May 19, 2016, a change of plea hearing was held. Doc. 15. At the hearing, Rodriquez entered pleas of no contest to all of the counts of the indictment. Id. The trial court then accepted the plea of no contest and found Rodriquez guilty of the offenses charged. Id. A sentencing hearing was then held on July 12, 2016. Doc. 17. The trial court then ordered that Rodriquez serve prison terms of five years each for Counts 1 and 3, with the terms to be served consecutive. Id. The trial court also ordered Rodriquez to serve a prison term of 36 months for Count 2 and ordered that this term be served concurrent to the others for an aggregate prison term of ten years. Id. Rodriquez then filed a timely appeal from this judgment. Doc. 19. On appeal, Rodriquez raises the following assignments of error.

         First Assignment of Error

         The trial court erred in finding [Rodriquez] guilty as [Rodriquez] never entered a plea in the instant matter.

         Second Assignment of Error

         The trial court erred by proceeding to sentence after the State did not adhere to their portion of the plea agreement.

         Third Assignment of Error

         [Rodriquez] received ineffective assistance of counsel.

         Fourth Assignment of Error

         The trial court erred by sentencing [Rodriquez] to consecutive sentences by failing to engage in the three step analysis required by [R.C. 2929.14(C)] and the supporting case law.

         On January 25, 2017, Rodriquez filed a supplemental brief raising two additional assignments of error based upon a ruling by the Supreme Court of Ohio in State v Gonzales, ___ Ohio St.3d ___, 2016-Ohio-8319, ___ N.E.2d ___. Rodriquez raised two additional assignments of error.

         First Supplemental Assignment of Error

         The trial court erred in finding [Rodriquez] guilty as [Rodriquez's] alleged plea was not made knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily pursuant to Crim.R. 11 in the instant matter.

         Second Supplemental Assignment of Error

         [Rodriquez] received ineffective assistance of counsel.

         For the purpose of clarity, we will address the assignments out of order.

         Entering a No Contest Plea

         {¶3} In the first assignment of error, Rodriquez claims that he never actually entered a plea of no contest. In cases involving felonies, a trial court may refuse to accept a plea of no contest and may not accept such a plea without first personally addressing the defendant and doing all of the following: 1) determining that the plea is being voluntarily entered with knowledge of the nature of the charges, potential sanctions, and eligibility for community control sanctions; 2) informing the defendant of and determining that the defendant understands the effect of the plea being entered, and informing the defendant that the trial court may proceed directly to sentencing; and 3) informing the defendant and determining that the defendant understands the rights he is waiving by entering the plea. Crim.R. 11(C)(2).

         {¶4} A review of the record in this case indicates that the following dialogue occurred.

The Court: Based upon those discussions at this time you're asking leave to withdraw the not guilty pleas previously tendered, tendering pleas of no contest to all three counts, Trafficking in Cocaine, A felony of the First Degree; Trafficking in Cocaine, a Felony of the ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.