Court Opinion

ID: 9607386
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 02:58:06.950302+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:02:38.539658
License: Public Domain

RABINOWITZ, Justice
(concurring).
Since Crim.R. 11 is identical to the provisions of Fed.R.Crim.P. 11 which are involved in this appeal, I believe it important that we avoid any intimation that Crim.R. 11 is to be administered without the court personally interrogating the defendant. Although I agree that no particular ritual is required by Crim.R. 11, I think that the better practice would be for the court to question the defendant personally in order to determine whether the plea is made voluntarily and with an understanding of the nature of the charge. United States v. Diggs, 304 F.2d 929, 930 (6th Cir. 1962); Domenica v. United States, 292 F.2d 483, 485-486 (1st Cir. 1961); Gundlach v. United States, 262 F.2d 72, 76 (4th Cir.1958), cert. denied, 360 U.S. 904, 79 S.Ct. 1283, 3 L.Ed.2d 1255 (1959); Julian v. United States, 236 F.2d 155, 158 (6th Cir. 1956).