COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA NO. 68893 : IN THE MATTER OF: : : JOHN BECKERT, A MINOR : : JOURNAL ENTRY : : and : : OPINION : : DATE OF ANNOUNCEMENT AUGUST 8, 1996 OF DECISION: CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: Civil appeal from Common Pleas Court Juvenile Division Case No. 9310143 JUDGMENT: Affirmed. DATE OF JOURNALIZATION: __________________________ APPEARANCES: For Appellant John Beckert: JAMES A. DRAPER, ESQ. Cuyahoga County Public Defender By: ROBERT M. INGERSOLL, ESQ. Assistant Public Defender 100 Lakeside Place 1200 West Third Street Cleveland, Ohio 44113 For Appellee State of Ohio: MICHAEL P. DONNELLY, ESQ. Assistant County Prosecutor 8th Floor Justice Center 1200 Ontario Street Cleveland, Ohio 44113 For Juvenile Court: Juvenile Court Clerk's Office, 2163 E. 22nd St. -2- Cleveland, Ohio 44115 -3- PATRICIA ANN BLACKMON, P.J: Appellant John Beckert, a minor, appeals the judgment of the juvenile court finding him in violation of his probation and sentencing him accordingly. He assigns the following error for our review: JOHN BECKERT WAS DEPRIVED OF HIS LIBERTY WITHOUT HIS RIGHT TO A HEARING, WHEN THE TRIAL COURT JUDGED HIM TO BE A PROBATION VIOLATOR ON THE BASIS OF AN ADMISSION THAT DID NOT COMPORT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF JUV.R. 29. Having reviewed the record of the proceedings and the legal arguments presented by the parties, we affirm the decision of the trial court. The apposite facts follow. A complaint was filed against Beckert, age fifteen, for kidnapping and rape. Beckert entered an admission to the charge of rape, and the trial court adjudged him delinquent. The charge of kidnapping was dismissed. Beckert was committed to the care of the Ohio Department of Youth Services for an indefinite term with a minimum period of twelve months and a maximum period not to exceed his attainment of the age of twenty-one, but the commitment order was stayed pending probation. Beckert was placed on intensive probation and ordered to undergo a Child Guidance Sex Offender program, referred to the Victim Aid/Restitution Program, and referred to Project Turn Around. Beckert's probation officer subsequently filed a probation violation complaint against him because he was terminated from the Child Guidance Sex Offender's program. At a hearing on the probation violation, the trial judge engaged Beckert in dialogue -4- and informed him of his right to a hearing, the right to remain silent, the right to offer evidence, the right to subpoena witnesses, the right to have the hearing recorded, the right to counsel, and the right to question any witnesses. Beckert was also informed of the consequences of an admission and asked if he wanted to have counsel appointed. Beckert waived his right to counsel and admitted to the allegation in the probation violation complaint. Consequently, the trial judge found Beckert to be in violation of the terms and conditions of his probation. Probation was terminated, the stay was lifted, and the original term of commitment was ordered into execution. This appeal followed. Beckert argues the trial court deprived him of his right to a hearing by failing to inform him of his right to confront witnesses under the requirements set forth in Juv.R. 29(D). Juv. R. 29(D) provides: (D) Initial Procedure Upon Entry of an Admission. The court may refuse to accept an admission and shall not accept an admission without addressing the party personally and determining both of the following: *** (2) The party understands that by entering an admission the party is waiving the right to challenge the witnesses and evidence against the party, to remain silent, and to introduce evidence at the adjudicatory hearing.*** This court has held Juv.R. 29(D) requires the trial court to engage a minor in the manner a trial court would address a criminal defendant in compliance with Crim.R. 11(C). In re Allen (Jan. 13, 1994), Cuyahoga App.No. 64441, unreported. See, also, In re McKenzie (Mar. 30, 1995), Cuyahoga App.No. 67843, unreported. -5- Therefore, the standard for reviewing whether a trial court complied with Juv.R. 29(D) is substantial compliance, which is a de novo standard of review. See State v. Stewart (1977), 51 Ohio St.2d 86 (provided Crim. R. 11(C) substantial compliance standard). Substantial compliance requires the trial court to engage the alleged offender in a "reasonably intelligible" dialogue, see State v. Ballard (1981), 66 Ohio St.2d 473; rote recitation of the rule by the trial judge is unnecessary. See Stewart, supra. A careful reading of the transcript in this case reveals the trial judge specifically asked Beckert, "You understand the fact that if you admit to these allegations, you will be waiving or giving up your right to remain silent, your right to offer evidence and your right to question any witnesses?" Beckert answered, "Yes, sir." There can be no dispute that this dialogue between the judge and Beckert is in substantial compliance with that portion of Juv.R. 29(D)(2) which requires the trial judge to determine whether the alleged offender understands "***he is waiving his right to challenge witnesses***." The trial judge's question was not a rote recitation of the rule, but there is no substantive difference between the "right to question any witnesses" and the "right to challenge witnesses." Accordingly, we find this assignment of error has no merit. Judgment affirmed. -6- It is ordered that Appellee recover of Appellant its costs herein taxed. The Court finds there were reasonable grounds for this appeal. It is ordered that a special mandate issue out of this Court directing the Common Pleas Court, Juvenile Division, to carry this judgment into execution. A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to Rule 27 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure. Exceptions. NAHRA, J., and O'DONNELL, J., CONCUR. PATRICIA ANN BLACKMON PRESIDING JUDGE N.B. This entry is made pursuant to the third sentence of Rule 22(D), Ohio Rules of Appellate Procedure. This is an announcement of decision (see Rule 26). Ten (10) days from the date hereof this document will be stamped to indicate journaliza- .