[Cite as State v. Bradley, 2013-Ohio-5146.]

COURT OF APPEALS 

ASHLAND COUNTY, OHIO 

FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT 

STATE OF OHIO 

 Plaintiff-Appellee 

-vsMICHAEL H. BRADLEY 

 Defendant-Appellant 

JUDGES: 

Hon. W. Scott Gwin, P. J. 

Hon. John W. Wise, J. 

Hon. Craig R. Baldwin, J. 

Case No. 13 COA 13 

O P I N I O N 

CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: Criminal Appeal from the Municipal Court, 

Case No. 13 CRB 306 

JUDGMENT: Reversed and Remanded 

DATE OF JUDGMENT ENTRY: November 20, 2013 

APPEARANCES: 

For Plaintiff-Appellee For Defendant-Appellant 

 MATTHEW J. MALONE 

 LAW OFFICES OF MATTHEW J. MALONE 

 11-1/2 East Second Street 

 Ashland, Ohio 44805 
Ashland County, Case No. 13 COA 13 2

Wise, J. 

{¶1} Appellant Michael H. Bradley appeals his sentence entered in the Ashland 

County Court of Common Pleas on one count of Domestic Violence, in violation of R.C. 

§2919.25(A). 

{¶2} Appellee State of Ohio did not file a response brief in this matter. 

STATEMENT OF THE FACTS AND CASE

{¶3} On March 10, 2010, the Ashland Police Department served a Summons 

and Complaint on Defendant-Appellant Michael H. Bradley, charging him with one count 

of domestic violence, pursuant to R.C. §2919.25(A), a misdemeanor of the first degree. 

{¶4} The Complaint alleged: 

{¶5} “The undersigned issuing officer says that the person whose name 

appears above did on the 10th day of March, 2013 at 3:30 PM unlawfully and knowingly 

cause or attempt to cause physical harm to a family member or household member to 

wit: Mr. Michael Bradley poked his father with a baseball bat and struck his mother in 

the left arm after a verbal altercation.” (Complaint and Summons, filed March 11, 2013.) 

{¶6} At his March 11, 2013 arraignment, Appellant appeared unrepresented by 

counsel and entered a plea of no contest to the charge contained in the Summons and 

Complaint. (Arraign. T. at 5). After a brief colloquy with Appellant, the trial court 

accepted his no contest plea, found him guilty of domestic violence, and ordered a presentence investigation. (Arraign. T. at 5-10, 14). 

{¶7} On April 23, 2013, Appellant appeared for sentencing, again without 

counsel. (Sent. T. at 1). The trial court sentenced Appellant to 180 days in the Ashland 

County Jail, suspended 150 days while giving credit for time served, placed him on 
County County, Case No. 3

intensive probation for one year, and ordered him to pay a fine of $150 plus court costs. 

(Sent. T. at 13-14). 

{¶8} Appellant now appeals, assigning the following errors for review: 

ASSIGNMENTS OF ERROR

{¶9} “I. THE ASHLAND, OHIO MUNICIPAL COURT ERRED BY NOT 

INQUIRING WHETHER DEFENDANT-APPELLANT WAS ABLE TO OBTAIN 

COUNSEL AND THEN IMPOSING A SENTENCE OF CONFINEMENT FOR HIS 

UNCOUNSELED NO CONTEST PLEA. 

{¶10} “II. THE ASHLAND, OHIO MUNICIPAL COURT ERRED BY NOT 

MAKING FURTHER INQUIRY INTO DEFENDANT-APPELLANT'S COMPETENCE 

WHERE THERE EXISTED SUFFICIENT INDICIA OF INCOMPETENCE TO ENTER A 

PLEA AND THEN BY ACCEPTING DEFENDANT-APPELLANT'S UNCOUNSELED NO 

CONTEST PLEA.” 

II. 

{¶11} For ease of discussion, we shall address Appellant’s assignments of error 

out of order. 

{¶12} In his Second Assignment of Error, Appellant argues that the trial court 

erred in not making further inquiry into his competence before accepting his no contest 

plea made without legal representation. 

{¶13} The conviction of a defendant who is not competent to enter a plea 

violates due process of law. See State v. Skatzes, 104 Ohio St.3d 195, 2004-Ohio6391, 819 N.E.2d 215, at ¶ 155, citing Drope v. Missouri (1975), 420 U.S. 162, 171, 95 

S.Ct. 896, 43 L.Ed.2d 103, and State v. Berry (1995), 72 Ohio St.3d 354, 359, 650 
County County, Case No. 4

N.E.2d 433. A trial court possesses no need to sua sponte inquire into a defendant's 

competency unless the record contains “ ‘sufficient indicia of incompetence,’ such that 

an inquiry * * * is necessary to ensure the defendant's right to a fair trial.” Berry, 72 Ohio 

St.3d at 359, quoting Drope, 420 U.S. at 175; see, also, State v. Ahmed, 103 Ohio St.3d 

27, 2004-Ohio-4190, 813 N.E.2d 637, at ¶ 65.However, in the absence of evidence to 

the contrary, a criminal defendant is rebuttably presumed competent to enter a guilty 

plea. See R.C. 2945.37(G); State v. Were, 118 Ohio St.3d 448, 2008-Ohio-2762, 890 

N.E.2d 263, at ¶ 45 

{¶14} Pursuant to R.C. 2945.37(G), a defendant is presumed competent to 

stand trial unless it is proved by a preponderance of the evidence in a hearing that 

because of his present mental condition, he is incapable of understanding the nature 

and objective of the proceedings against him or of assisting in his defense. “The test for 

competency is whether the defendant has a sufficient present ability to consult with his 

lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding and whether he has a 

rational as well as factual understanding of proceedings against him.” In re Kristopher 

F., Stark App. No. 2006CA00312, 2007–Ohio–3259, ¶ 25. 

{¶15} During Appellant’s arraignment, it was explained to the trial court that the 

events leading up to the domestic violence charge were brought on by Appellant’s 

failure to take his medication and the parents’ efforts to try to make him take such 

medication. A review of the transcript from the arraignment reveals over a dozen 

references made regarding Appellant’s failure to take his medication, his mental health, 

and the fact that he suffers from schizophrenia. 
County County, Case No. 5

{¶16} Further, the transcript from the sentencing hearing reveals that the 

sentencing hearing had to be postponed due to the fact that Appellant was receiving 

treatment in Heartland Behavioral Healthcare center for 40 days. (Sent. T. at 5). 

Additionally, much discussion was had regarding Appellant’s mental health, his need for 

medication, which would include monthly injections of Haldol, the need for weekly 

counseling and monthly psychiatric treatment. (Sent. T. at 7-9) It was also discussed 

that Appellant takes Depakote for mood stabilization and Cogentin for the side effects. 

(Sent. T. at 10). 

{¶17} Based on the record before us, we find there are sufficient indicia of 

incompetency to warrant a hearing on the issue of incompetency. “It is settled law that 

‘a person whose mental condition is such that he lacks the capacity to understand the 

nature and object of the proceedings against him, to consult with counsel, and to assist 

in preparing his defense may not be subjected to a trial.’ ” State v. Rubenstein, 40 Ohio 

App.3d 57, 60, 531 N.E.2d 732 (8th Dist.1987), quoting Drope v. Missouri, 420 U.S. 

162, 171, 95 S.Ct. 896, 43 L.Ed.2d 103 (1975). 

{¶18} Appellant’s Second Assignment of Error is sustained. 

I. 

{¶19} In his First Assignment of Error, Appellant asserts the trial court violated 

his Constitutional right to counsel as well his rights under Crim.R. 11 and 44. 

Specifically, Appellant submits the trial court violated his rights by failing to appoint an 

attorney for him or having him voluntarily, intelligently, and knowingly waive such right; 

by accepting his plea without undertaking a Crim.R. 11 colloquy; and by failing to inquire 
County County, Case No. 6

and determine whether Rouse's plea was voluntarily, intelligently, and knowingly 

entered. 

{¶20} Crim. R.11 governs pleas and a defendant's rights upon entering a plea as 

follows: 

{¶21} “(A) Pleas 

{¶22} “A defendant may plead not guilty, not guilty by reason of insanity, guilty 

or, with the consent of the court, no contest. A plea of not guilty by reason of insanity 

shall be made in writing by either the defendant or the defendant's attorney. All other 

pleas may be made orally. The pleas of not guilty and not guilty by reason of insanity 

may be joined. If a defendant refuses to plead, the court shall enter a plea of not guilty 

on behalf of the defendant. 

{¶23} “* * * 

{¶24} “(D) Misdemeanor cases involving serious offenses 

{¶25} “In misdemeanor cases involving serious offenses the court may refuse to 

accept a plea of guilty or no contest, and shall not accept such plea without first 

addressing the defendant personally and informing the defendant of the effect of the 

pleas of guilty, no contest, and not guilty and determining that the defendant is making 

the plea voluntarily. Where the defendant is unrepresented by counsel the court shall 

not accept a plea of guilty or no contest unless the defendant, after being readvised that 

he or she has the right to be represented by retained counsel, or pursuant to Crim.R. 44 

by appointed counsel, waives this right. 

{¶26} “(E) Misdemeanor cases involving petty offenses 
County County, Case No. 7

{¶27} “In misdemeanor cases involving petty offenses the court may refuse to 

accept a plea of guilty or no contest, and shall not accept such pleas without first 

informing the defendant of the effect of the plea of guilty, no contest, and not guilty.” Id. 

{¶28} Crim.R. 2(D) defines a “petty offense” as: “a misdemeanor other than a 

serious offense.” “Serious offense” is defined as “any felony, and any misdemeanor for 

which the penalty prescribed by law includes confinement for more than six months.” 

Crim.R. 2(C).

{¶29} The offense of domestic violence as charged against Appellant is a first 

degree misdemeanor for which the penalty prescribed by law does not include 

confinement for more than six months. Thus, the trial court was required to follow the 

procedure set forth in Crim.R. 11(E). 

{¶30} A review of the record reveals that the trial court did not inquire of the 

Appellant whether he was able to obtain counsel, and if he was unable, whether he 

waived the right to appointed counsel. 

{¶31} Based on the foregoing, we find Appellant’s First Assignment of Error welltaken and sustain same. 

 
County County, Case No. 8

{¶32} For the foregoing reasons, the decision of the Municipal Court of Ashland 

County, Ohio, is reversed and this matter is remanded for further proceedings 

consistent with the law and this opinion. 

By: Wise, J. 

Gwin, P. J., and 

Baldwin, J., concur. 

 _________________________________ 

 HON. JOHN W. WISE 

 _________________________________ 

 HON. W. SCOTT GWIN 

 

 _________________________________ 

 HON. CRAIG R. BALDWIN 

JWW/d 11/04
Ashland County, Case No. 13 COA 13 9

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR ASHLAND COUNTY, OHIO 

FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT 

STATE OF OHIO : 

 : 

 Plaintiff-Appellee : 

 : 

-vs- : JUDGMENT ENTRY 

 : 

MICHAEL H. BRADLEY : 

 : 

 Defendant-Appellant : Case No. 13 COA 13 

 For the reasons stated in our accompanying Memorandum-Opinion, the 

judgment of the Municipal Court of Ashland County, Ohio, is reversed and remanded for 

further proceedings consistent with this opinion. 

 Costs assessed to Appellee. 

 ___________________________________ 

 HON. JOHN W. WISE 

 ___________________________________ 

 HON. W. SCOTT GWIN 

 ___________________________________ 

 HON. CRAIG R. BALDWIN