[Cite as State v. Wheeler, 2011-Ohio-3423.]

 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, OHIO 

STATE OF OHIO : 

Plaintiff-Appellee : C.A. CASE NO. 24112 

v. : T.C. NO. 09CR1640 

ERIC D. WHEELER : (Criminal appeal from 

 Common Pleas Court) 

Defendant-Appellant : 

 : 

 . . . . . . . . . . 

O P I N I O N

Rendered on the 8th day of July , 2011. 

 . . . . . . . . . . 

TIMOTHY J. COLE, Atty. Reg. No. 0084117, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, 301 W. 

Third Street, 5th Floor, Dayton, Ohio 45422 

Attorney for Plaintiff-Appellee 

ROBERT E. SEARFOSS, III, Atty. Reg. No. 0078906, 321 N. Main Street, Bowling Green, 

Ohio 43402 

Attorney for Defendant-Appellant 

 . . . . . . . . . . 

FROELICH, J. 

{¶ 1} Eric D. Wheeler pled guilty in the Montgomery County Court of Common 

Pleas to possession of crack cocaine, a third degree felony. The trial court had previously 

overruled, after a hearing, his motion to suppress evidence, which claimed that his detention 
2

and the seizure of the drugs by the police violated his Fourth Amendment rights. Wheeler 

was sentenced to two years in prison, a fine of $1,542, and a six-month driver’s license 

suspension. 

{¶ 2} In his sole assignment of error, Wheeler claims that the trial court erred in 

denying his motion to suppress. By pleading guilty, however, Wheeler has waived his right 

to claim error with respect to the trial court’s denial of his motion to suppress evidence. 

E.g., State v. Smith, Clark App. No. 08 CA 60, 2009-Ohio-5048, ¶13; State v. Fitzpatrick, 

102 Ohio St.3d 321, 2004-Ohio-3167, ¶78. 

{¶ 3} A plea of guilty is a complete admission of guilt. E.g., State v. Barrett, 

Montgomery App. No. 24150, 2011-Ohio-2303, ¶3; Crim.R. 11(B)(1). Consequently, a 

guilty plea waives all appealable errors that may have occurred in the trial court, including 

the denial of a motion to suppress, unless such errors precluded Wheeler from knowingly, 

intelligently, and voluntarily entering his guilty plea. E.g., State v. Kelley (1991), 57 Ohio 

St.3d 127, paragraph two of the syllabus; Smith at ¶13; State v. Kaznoch, Cuyahoga App. 

No. 93951, 2010-Ohio-5474, ¶8-9. Wheeler makes no such claim in this case, and we find 

nothing in the record to suggest that such a defect exists. To the contrary, Wheeler’s 

counsel stated at the beginning of the plea hearing: 

{¶ 4} “[Wheeler] will be entering a plea of guilty to the charge of possession, Your 

Honor. I believe it’s the agreement of the parties that it is mandatory time. However, 

we’re agreeing there would be a cap of two years *** which as I informed my client which 

means he will be getting a one- or two-year sentence. I’ve also explained to him about the 

guilty plea, he’s waiving all appellate rights, so he won’t be appealing the Motion to 
3

Suppress hearing.” 

{¶ 5} The court asked Wheeler if he understood his counsel’s statements and if 

“[t]his is what you wish to do.” Wheeler responded affirmatively, and the court proceeded 

to take his guilty plea. Wheeler’s guilty plea thus waived the error that he assigns on 

appeal. 

{¶ 6} The assignment of error is overruled. 

{¶ 7} The trial court’s judgment will be affirmed. 

 . . . . . . . . . . 

GRADY, P.J. and DONOVAN, J., concur. 

Copies mailed to: 

Timothy J. Cole 

Robert E. Searfoss, III 

Hon. Michael L. Tucker