State v. Boddy

Summary

The Ohio First District Court of Appeals affirmed Paul Boddy’s convictions for firearm-related offenses after no-contest pleas. The court held that Boddy expressly entered his pleas through a signed written entry, that the trial court’s advisement regarding the effect of the pleas did not require reversal absent a showing of prejudice, and that Boddy abandoned or withdrew his unresolved Second Amendment-based motion to dismiss by entering the pleas.

Holdings

1. A criminal defendant may formally tender a no-contest plea by signing a writing that expressly enters the plea; an oral tender is not required when the signed writing expressly changes the plea from not guilty to no contest.
2. When a trial court does not fully explain the effect of a no-contest plea, the plea is not automatically vacated unless the court completely failed to comply with Crim.R. 11(C)(2)(b); where the defendant received the required information in a signed plea form and failed to show prejudice, the convictions stand.
3. A defendant who abandons or withdraws a motion to dismiss before the trial court rules on it, and then enters no-contest pleas, waives the constitutional challenge for appeal.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court could accept Boddy’s no-contest pleas when he did not orally state on the record that he was pleading no contest.
2. Whether the trial court’s failure to orally explain the effect of the no-contest pleas under Crim.R. 11(C)(2)(b) required vacatur of the convictions without a showing of prejudice.
3. Whether Boddy preserved his Second Amendment challenge to the indictment when he failed to pursue his motion to dismiss and entered no-contest pleas.

Disposition

affirmed