From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Hollowell

Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA
Jun 5, 2014
2014 Ohio 2407 (Ohio Ct. App. 2014)

Opinion

No. 100674

06-05-2014

STATE OF OHIO PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE v. MARQUIS HOLLOWELL DEFENDANT-APPELLANT

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT Robert L. Tobik Cuyahoga County Public Defender BY: Jeffrey Gamso Assistant County Public Defender ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE Timothy J. McGinty Cuyahoga County Prosecutor BY: Katherine Mullin Assistant County Prosecutor


JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION


JUDGMENT:

REVERSED AND REMANDED


Criminal Appeal from the

Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas

Case No. CR-13-575538-A

BEFORE: Stewart, J., Boyle, A.J., and Blackmon, J.

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT

Robert L. Tobik
Cuyahoga County Public Defender
BY: Jeffrey Gamso
Assistant County Public Defender

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE

Timothy J. McGinty
Cuyahoga County Prosecutor
BY: Katherine Mullin
Assistant County Prosecutor
MELODY J. STEWART, J.:

{¶1} Defendant-appellant Marquis Hollowell pleaded guilty to a single count of felonious assault. In an issue that is dispositive of this appeal, he argues that the court violated Crim.R. 11(C)(2) by failing to inform him during the plea colloquy that the state was required to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

{¶2} The state concedes the error and our review of the record substantiates the error — the court did not inform Hollowell during the plea colloquy that the state had to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt as required by Crim.R. 11(C)(2). This is reversible error. See State v. Veney, 120 Ohio St.3d 176, 2008-Ohio-5200, 897 N.E.2d 621, syllabus; State v. Woods, 192 Ohio App.3d 494, 2011-Ohio-727, 949 N.E.2d 574, ¶ 40-41 (8th Dist.) The first assignment of error is sustained. Consequently, the second assignment of error relating to a sentencing error is moot.

{¶3} This cause is reversed and remanded to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

It is ordered that appellant recover of appellee his costs herein taxed.

The court finds there were reasonable grounds for this appeal.

It is ordered that a special mandate issue out of this court directing the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas to carry this judgment into execution. A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to Rule 27 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure. __________
MELODY J. STEWART, JUDGE
MARY J. BOYLE, A.J., and
PATRICIA ANN BLACKMON, J., CONCUR


Summaries of

State v. Hollowell

Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA
Jun 5, 2014
2014 Ohio 2407 (Ohio Ct. App. 2014)
Case details for

State v. Hollowell

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF OHIO PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE v. MARQUIS HOLLOWELL DEFENDANT-APPELLANT

Court:Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA

Date published: Jun 5, 2014

Citations

2014 Ohio 2407 (Ohio Ct. App. 2014)