Appellant cannot challenge evidentiary rulings by the trial court because the rulings occurred before appellant chose to plead guilty and his guilty plea was a full admission of his guilt.
.]
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO
CLERMONT COUNTY
STATE OF OHIO, :
Appellee, : CASE NO. CA2018-12-086
: OPINION
- vs - 8/12/2019
:
ADAM M. DOUGLAS, :
Appellant. :
CRIMINAL APPEAL FROM CLERMONT COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
Case No. 2018-CR-00039
D. Vincent Faris, Clermont County Prosecuting Attorney, Katherine Terpstra, 74 S. Riverside
Drive, 2nd Floor, Batavia, Ohio 45103, for appellee
Strauss Troy, Richard L. Crosby III., 150 E. 4th Street, 4th Floor, Cincinnati, Ohio 45202, for
appellant
PIPER, J.
{¶ 1} Appellant, Adam Douglas, appeals his convictions in the Clermont County
Court of Common Pleas for gross sexual imposition and rape.
{¶ 2} Douglas was in a relationship with the victim's mother, and during that time,
became a father figure to the victim. After a child services agency investigated reports of
improper conduct between Douglas and the child, Douglas was indicted on four counts of
Clermont CA2018-12-086
rape and two counts of gross sexual imposition. The rape charges included forced vaginal,
anal, and oral sex with the victim, who was 12 years old at the time.
{¶ 3} Douglas pled not guilty and the matter proceeded to trial. On the third day of
trial, before the state had rested, Douglas withdrew his former not guilty pleas and pled guilty
to four amended counts of rape and two counts of gross sexual imposition. The trial court
sentenced Douglas to 20 years in prison. Douglas now appeals his convictions, raising two
assignments of error specific to evidentiary issues that occurred at the trial.
{¶ 4} According to Crim.R. 11(B)(1), a guilty plea constitutes a complete admission of
guilt. As such, a guilty plea "renders irrelevant those constitutional violations not logically
inconsistent with the valid establishment of factual guilt and which do not stand in the way of
conviction if factual guilt is validly established." State v. Fitzpatrick,
, ¶ 78. Therefore, a defendant who voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently
enters a guilty plea with the assistance of counsel may not subsequently raise independent
claims involving an alleged deprivation of constitutional rights occurring prior to the guilty
plea.
An exception to this rule exists when an appellant challenges the trial court's
jurisdiction or the constitutionality of the statute violated. Id. at ¶ 79.
{¶ 5} Rather than raise either of these specific arguments or assign as error that his
plea was not voluntary, knowing, and intelligent, Douglas merely stated in his brief that
mistakes made by the trial court regarding evidentiary issues forced him to enter a guilty
plea. However, the record does not show that Douglas was forced into his plea by
evidentiary decisions or any specific factor that requires review on appeal. Instead, the
record supports the validity of Douglas' plea and that he made such of his own free will.
{¶ 6} Douglas was provided a proper Crim.R. 11 colloquy at the time of his plea,
which informed Douglas of the rights he was waiving by virtue of his plea, as well as the
applicable punishments he faced. At no time did Douglas indicate that he felt forced into
-2-
Clermont CA2018-12-086
pleading guilty or that the evidentiary decisions made by the trial court factored into his
decision to plead guilty.
{¶ 7} Nor does Douglas suggest that the trial court lacked jurisdiction or that the rape
and gross sexual imposition statutes are unconstitutional. Hence, Douglas is precluded from
assigning as error any alleged evidentiary issues which occurred at trial before he pled guilty
to the charges.
{¶ 8} Douglas' assignments of error are overruled.
{¶ 9} Judgment affirmed.
S. POWELL, P.J., and M. POWELL, J., concur.
-3-
